Violence and the labor Movement

THE LIBRARY

OF THE

NEW YORK STATE SCHOOL

OF

INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR

RELATIONS

AT
CORNELL UNIVERSITY

The original of tliis bool< is in
tine Cornell University Library.

There are no known copyright restrictions in
the United States on the use of the text.

http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924002641052

VIOLENCE

AND THE

LABOR MOVEMENT

BY

ROBERT HUNTER

AUTHOK OF "POVERTY," "SOCIALISTS AT WORK," ETC.

PROfHRTY OF LIBRARY

lEW yr:;^ state t^^m.

CORNELL UNIVEFJCITY "^ "^

^\o gorfe

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY

1922

PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA;

CopmGHT, lgi4
Bv THE MACMILLAN COMPANY

Set up and electiotyped. Published March, 1 i) 1 4.

FEBSIS

PRINTING COMPANY

NEW YORK CITY

THIS VOLUME IS AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED
BY THE AUTHOR TO

EUGENE V. DEBS

aO NEVER TURNED HIS BA(
MARCHED BREAST FORWARD,

"one who never turned HIS BACK BUT

NEVER DOUBTED CLOUDS WOULD BREAK,"
AND

D. DOUGLAS WILSON

WHO, THOUGH PARALYZED AND BLIND, HAS SO LONG AND
FAITHFULLY BLAZED THE TRAIL FOR LABOR

6'\

PREFACE

This volume is the result of some studies that I felt
impelled to make when, about three years ago, certain
sections of the labor movement in the United States were
discussing vehemently political action versus direct ac-
tion. A number of causes combined to produce a seri-
ous and critical controversy. The Industrial Workers of
the World were carrying on a lively agitation that later
culminated in a series of spectacular strikes. With ideas
and methods that were not only in opposition to those of
the trade unions, but also to those of the socialist party,
the new organization sought to displace the older organii
zations by what it called the "one Big Union." There
were many in the older organizations who firmly believed
in industrial unionism, and the dissensions which arose
were not so much over that question as over the an-
tagonistic character of the new movement and its ad-
vocacy here of the violent methods employed by the revo-
lutionary section of the French unions. The most force-
ful and active spokesman of these methods was Mr.
William D. Haywood, and, largely as a result of his agi-
tation, la greve generate and le sabotage became the sub-
jects of the hour in labor and socialist circles. In 191 1
Mr. Haywood and Mr. Frank Bohn published a booklet,
entitled Industrial Socialism, in which they urged that
the worker should "use any weapon which will win his
fight." * They declared that, as "the present laws of

*P. 57.

viii VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

property are made by and for the capitalists, the workers
should not hesitate to break them." *

The advocacy of such doctrines alarmed the older so-
cialists, who were familiar with the many disasters that
had overtaken the labor movement in its earlier days,
and nearly all of them assailed the direct actionists. J^Iji.
Eug ene y. De bs, Mr. Victor L. Berger^ Mr. J ohn Spargo,

Mr. MornsTKirquitrand many others, less -v^ell known,
combated "the new methods" in vigorous language. Mr.
Hillquit dealt with the question in a manner that imme-
diately awakened the attention of every active socialist.
Condemning without reserve every resort to lawbreaking
and violence, and insisting that both were "ethically un-
justifiable and tactically suicidal," Mr. Hillquit pointed oiit|
that whenever any group or section of the labor move-j
ment "has embarked upon a policy of 'breaking the law'
or using 'any weapons which will win the fight,' whether
such policy was styled 'terrorism,' 'propaganda of the
deed,' 'direct action,' 'sabotage,' or 'anarchism,' it has in-
variably served to demoralize and destroy the movement,
by attracting to it professional criminals, infesting it
with spies, leading the workers to needless and senseless
slaughter, and ultimately engendering a spirit of disgust
and reaction. It was this advocacy of 'lawbreaking^:
which Marx and Engels fought so severely in the Inter-
national and which finally led to the disruption of the
first great international parliament of labor, and the so-
cialist party of every country in the civilized world has
since uniformly and emphatically rejected that policy." f
There could be no better introduction to the present"
volume than these words of Mr. Hillquit, and it will, I
think, be clear to the reader that the history of the labor-

*P. 57.

fThe New York Call, November 20, 191 1.

PREFACE

movement during the last half-century fully sustains Mr.
Hillquit's position. The problem of methods has always
been a vital matter to the labor movement, and, for i
hundred years at least, the quarrels now dividing sytidi-
calists and socialists have disturbed that movement. In
the Chartist days "the "physical f orcists " o pposed the
'feoral f bHi"sIs,''^'73^ri37 later "dissensions over the same'
q uestion occurred between th e Bakouninists and thei
Marxists. Since then anarchists and social demo-/
crats, direct actionists and political actionists, syndical-
ists and socialists have continued the battle. I have at-
tempted here to present the arguments made by botl
sides of this controversy, and, while no doubt my bias is
perfectly clear, I hope I have presented fairly the posi-i-
tion of each of the contending elements. Fortunately,
the .direct actionists have exercised a detertn'ii irg itvfl.ugn/'<»
only in a. few places, and evervwhere , in the.end -JJie.vic-
jory of. those vi?ho were contending for t he employm ent
of peaceable means has~^eri'coinpIe Fer'"'Xlr^idY in this
country, as a result of the recent controversy, it is writ-
ten in the constitution of the socialist party that "any
member of the party who opposes political action or ad-
vocates crime, sabotage, or other methods of violence as
a weapon of the working class to aid in its emancipation
shall be expelled from membership in the party." *
Adopted by the national convention of the party in 191 1,
this clause was ratified at a general referendum of all the
membership of the party. It is clear, therefore, that the
immense majority of socialists are determined to employ
peaceable and legal methods of action.

It is, of course, perfectly obvious that the methods
to be employed in the struggles between classes, as be-
tween nations, cannot be predetermined. And, while

* Article II, Section 6.

X VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

the socialists everywhere have condemned the use of vio-
le nt mea sujies . anr~are~ no w exercising .ever^Li'?^^'^--^*
thieir command to keep the struggle between labor and
capital otTTeg^.'^ grouncC" everifs " aloner will determine
whether the j^reat social problems of our day can be set-
tle^p.eai5eabiyr'*"f he entire matter is largeiy in the hands
of the ruling classes. And, while the socialists in all
countries are determined not to allow themselves to be
provoked into acts of despair by temporary and fleeting
methods of repression, conditions may of course arise
where no organization, however powerful, could prevent
the masses from breaking into an open and bloody con-
flict. On one memorable occasion (March 31, 1886),
August Bebel uttered some impressive words on this
subject in the German Reichstag. "Herr von Putt-
kamer," said Bebel, "calls to mind the speech which I
delivered in 1881 in the debate on the Socialist Law a
few days after the murder of the Czar. I did not then
glorify regicide. I declared that a system like that pre-
vailing in Russia necessarily gave birth to Nihilism and
must necessarily lead to deeds of violence. Yes, I do
not hesitate to say that if you should inaugurate such
a system in Germany it Would of necessity lead to
deeds of violence with us as well. (A deputy called
out: 'The German Monarchy?') The German Monar-
chy would then certainly be affected, and I do not hesi-
tate to say that I should be one of the first to lend a hand
in the work, for all measures are allowable against such
a system." * I take it that Bebel was, in this instance,
simply pointing out to the German bureaucracy the in-
evitable consequences of the Russian system. At that
very moment he was restraining hundreds of thousands'
* Quoted by Dawson, "German Socialism and Ferdinand Las-
salle," p. 272.

PREFACE xi

of his followers from acts of despair, yet he could not
resist warning the German rulers that the time might
come in that country when no considerations whatever
could persuade men to forego the use of the most violent
retaliative measures. This view is, of course, well estab-
lished in our national history, and our Declaration of In-
dependence, as well as many of our State constitutions,
asserts that it is both the right and the duty of the
people to overthrow by any means in their power an op-
pressive and tyrannical government. This was, of
course, always the teaching of what Marx liked to call
"the bourgeois democrats." It was, in fact, their only
conception of revolution.

/I^he socialist idea of revolution is quite a different
lone. Insurrection plays no necessary part in it, and no
[one sees more clearly than the socialist that nothing could
prove more disastrous to the democratic cause than to
have the present class conflict break into a civil war. If
such a war becomes necessary, it will be in spite of the
organized socialists, who, in every country of the world,
not only seek to avoid, but actually caademn, riOtSQs, tem-
pestuous, and violent measures. Such measures do not
fit into their philosopRy)" which sees, as the cause of our
present intolerable social wrongs, not the malevolence of
individuals or of classes, but the workings of certain
economic laws. One can cut off the head of an indi^
vidual, but it is not possible to cut off the head of an
economic law. From the beginning of the modern SO"*^
cialist movement, this has been perfectly clear to the so-
cialist, whose philosophy has taught him that appeals to)
violence tend, as Engels has pointed out, to obscure tha
understanding of the real development of things. — J
The dissensions over the use of force, that have been
so continuous and pag^jpjjate in the labor movement,

VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

ajjigg from two diametrically opposed points of view.
Dne is at bottom anarchistic, and looks upon all social
evils as the result of individual wrong-doing. The other
is at bottom socialistic, and looks upon all social evils as
(in the main the result of economic and social laws. To
hSiose who believe there are good trusts and bad trusts,
good capitalists and bad capitalists, and that this is an
adequate analysis of our economic ills, there is, of course,
after all, nothing left but hatred of individuals and, in
the extreme case, the desire to remove those individuals.
To those, on the other hand, who see in certain und erly-
ing e conom ic forces t he source of nearlv all of our d is-
tressing soci al evils, individual hatred and malice ca n
!^aloeia,jcgaIiftUl.Q.aiaieaJi- This volume, on its historical
side, as well as in its survey of the psychology of the
various elements in the labor movement, is a contribu-
tion to the study of the reactions that affect various
minds and temperaments in the face of modern social
wrongs. If one's point of view is that of the anarchist,
he is led inevitably to make his war upon individuals.
The more sensitive and sincere he is, the more bitter
and implacable becomes that war. If one's point of view
is based on what is now called the economic interpreta-
tipn of history, one is emancipated, in so far as that is
possible for emotional beings, from all hatred of indi-
viduals,^ and one sees before him only the necessity of
readjusting the economic basis of our common life in
order to achieve a more nearly perfect social order.

In contrasting the temperaments, the points of view,
the philosophy, and the methods of these two antagonis-
tic minds, I have been forced to take two extremes, the
Bakouninist anarchist and the Marxian socialist. In the
case of the former, it has been necessary to present the
views of a particular school of anarchism, more or less

PREFACE xiii

regardless of certain other schools. Proudhon, Stirner,
W^r^ Tand luckgf^ do not advocate violent measures,
and Tolstoi, Ibsen, Spencer, Thoreau, and Emerson —
although having the anarchist point of view — can hardly
oe conceived of as advocating violent measures. It will
be obvious to the reader that I have not dealt with the
philosophical anarchism, or whatever one may call it,
of these last. I have confined myself to the anarchism
of those who have endeavored to carry out their princi-
ples in the democratic movement of their time and to the
deeds of those who threw themselves into the active life
about them and endeavored to impress both their ideas
and methods upon the awakening world of labor. It is
the anarchism of these men that the world knows. By
deeds and not by words have they written their definition
of anarchism, and I am taking and using the term in this
volume in the sense in which it is used most commonly
by people in general. If this offends the anarchists of the
non-resistant or passive-resistant type, it cannot be
helped. It is the meaning that the most active of the
anarchists have themselves given it.

I have sought to take my statements from first-hand
sources only, although in a few cases I have had to de-
pend on secondary sources. I am deeply indebted to Mr.
Herman Schlueter, editor of the New Yorker Volkszei-
tung, for lending me certain rare books and pamphlets,
and also for reading carefully and critically the entire
manuscript. With his help I have managed to get every
document that has seemed to me essential. At the end
of the volume will be found a complete list of the au-
thorities which I have consulted. I have to regret that I
could not read, before sending this manuscript to the
publisher, the four volumes just published of the corre-
spondence between Marx and Engels (Der Briefwechsel

xiv VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT-

zwischen Friedrich Engels und Karl Marx 1844 , &w 188^,
herausgegeben von A. Bebel und Ed. Bernstein, J- H. W.
Dietz, Stuttgart, 1913). I must also express here my
gratitude to Mr. Morris Hillquit and to Miss Helen
Phelps Stokes for making many valuable suggestions, as
well as my indebtedness to Miss Helen Bernice Sweeney
and Mr. Sidney S. Bobbe for their most capable secre-
tarial assistance. Special appreciation is due my wife for
her helpfulness and painstaking care at many difficult
stages of the work.

Highland Farm,
Noroton Heights,
Connecticut.
November i, 1913.

CONTENTS

Pkeface

PART I
TERRORISM IN WESTERN EUROPE

SAPTER PACK

I. The Father of Tekrorism 3

II. A Series of Insurrections ..... 28

III. The Propaganda of the Deed 49

IV. JOHANN Most in America , 62

V. A Series of Tragedies "jy

VI. Seeking the Causes 90

PART II

STRUGGLES WITH VIOLENCE

VII. The Birth of Modern Socialism .

VIII. The Battle Between Marx and Bakounin

IX. The Fight for Existence

X. The Newest Anarchism

XL The Oldest Anarchism

XII. Visions of Victory

Authorities

Index ^

I2S

IS4
194

229

276

327

3S7

375

PART I
TERRORISM IN WESTERN EUROPE

MICHAEL BAKOUNIN

Violence and the Labor
Movement

CHAPTER I

THE FATHER OF TERRORISM

"Dante tells us," writes Macaulay, "that he saw, in
Malebolge, a strange encounter between a human form
and a serpent. The enemies, after cruel wounds inflicted,
stood for a time glaring on each other. A great cloud
surrounded them, and then a wonderful metamorphosis
began. Each creature was transfigured into the likeness
of its antagonist. The serpent's tail divided into two
legs; the man's legs intertwined themselves into a tail.
The body of the serpent put forth arms ; the arms of the
man shrank into his body. At length the serpent stood
up a man, and spake ; the man sank down a serpent, and
glided hissing away." ( i ) Something, I suppose, not un-
like this appalling picture of Dante's occurs in the world
whenever a man's soul becomes saturated with hatred.
It will be remembered, for instance, that even Shelley's
all-forgiving and sublime Prometheus was forced by the
torture of the furies to cry out in anguish,

"Whilst I behold such execrable shapes;
Methinks I grow like what I contemplate."

It would not be strange, then, if here and there a man's
entire nature were transfigured when he sees a monster

3

4 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

appear, cruel, pitiless, and unyielding, crushing to the
earth the weak, the weary, and the heavy-laden. Nor is
it strange that in Russia — the blackest Malebolge in the
modern world — a litter of avengers is born ^every genera-
tion of the savage brutality, the murderous oppression,
the Satanic infamy of the Russian government. And
who does not love those innumerable Russian youths and
maidens, driven to acts of defiance — ^hopeless, futile, yet
necessary — if for no other reason than to fulfill their
duty to humanity and thus perhaps quiet a quivering con-
science? There is something truly Promethean in the
struggle of the Russian youth against their overpowering
antagonist. They know that the price of one single act
of protest is their lives. Yet, to the eternal credit of hu-
manity, thousands of them have thrown themselves naked
on the spears of their enemy, to become an example of
sacrificial revolt. And can any of us wonder that when
even this tragic seeding of the martyrs proved unfruit-
ful, many of the Russian youth, brooding over the ir-
remediable wrongs of their people, were driven to in-
sanity and suicide? And, if all that was possible, would
it be surprising if it also happened that at least one
flaming rebel should have developed a philosophy of war-
fare no less terrible than that of the Russian bureaucracy
itself ? I do not know, nor would I allow myself to sug-
gest, that Michael Bakounin, who brought into Western
Europe and planted there the seeds of terrorism, came
to be like what he contemplated, or that his philosophy,,,
and tactics of action were altogether a reflection of those*"
he opposed. Yet, if that were the case, one could better
understand that bitter and bewildering character.

That there is some justification for speculation on
these grounds is indicated by the heroes of Bakounin.
He always meant to write the story of Prometheus, and

THE FATHER OF TERRORISM 5

he never spoke of Satan without an admiration that ap-
proached adoration. They were the two unconquerable
enemies of absolutism. He was "the eternal rebel,"
Bakounin once said of Satan, "the first free-thinker and
emancipator of the worlds." (2) In another place he
speaks of Proudhon as having the instinct of a revolu-
tionist, because "he adored Satan and proclaimed anar-
chy." (3) In still another place he refers to the prole-
tariat of Paris as "the modern Satan, the great rebel,
vanquished, but not pacified." (4) In the statutes of
his secret organization, of which I shall speak again later,
he insists that "principles, programs, and rules are not
nearly as important as that the persons who put them
into execution shall have the devil in them." (5) Al-
though an avowed and militant atheist, Bakounin could
not subdue his worship of the king of devils, and, had
anyone during his life said that Bakounin was not only
a modern Satan incarnate, but the eight other devils as
well, nothing could have delighted him more. And no
doubt he was inspired to this demon worship by his im-
placable hatred of absolutism — whether it be in religion,
which he considered as tyranny over the mind, or in gov-
ernment, which he considered as tyranny over the body.
To Bakounin the two eternal enemies of man were the
Government and the Church, and no weapon was un-
worthy of use which promised in any measure to assist
in their entire and complete obliteration.

Absolutism was to Bakounin a universal destroyer of
the best and the noblest qualities in man. And, as it
stands as an effective barrier to the only social order that
can lift man above the beast — ^that of perfect liberty — so
must the sincere warrior against absolutism become the
universal destroyer of any and everjrthing associated
with tyranny. How far such a crusade leads one may

6 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

be gathered from Bakounin's own words: "The end
of revolution can be no other," he declares, "than
the destruction of all powers— religious, monarchi-
cal, aristocratic, and bourgeois — ^in Europe. Conse-
quently, the destruction of all now existing States, with
all their institutions— political, juridical, bureaucratic,
and financial." (6) In another place he says : "It will be
essential to destroy ever)rthing, and especially and before
all else, all property and its inevitable corollary, the
State." (7) "We want to destroy all States," he re-
peats in still another place, "and all Churches, with all
their institutions and their laws of religion, politics, ju-'
risprudence, finance, police, universities, economics, and
society, in order that all these millions of poor, deceived,
enslaved, tormented, exploited human beings, delivered
from all their official and officious directors and bene-
factors, associations, and individuals, can at last breathe
with complete freedom." (8) All through life Bakou-
nin clung tenaciously to this immense idea of destruc-
tion, "terrible, total, inexorable, and universal," for only
after such a period of destructive terror — ^in which every
vestige of "the institutions of tyranny" shall be swept
from the earth — can "anarchy, that is to say, the com-
plete manifestation of unchained popular life," (9) de-
velop liberty, equality, and justice. These were the
means, and this was the end that Bakounin had in mind
all the days of his life from the time he convinced him-
self as a yotmg man that "the desire for destruction is
at the same time a creative desire." ( 10)

Even so brief a glimpse into Bakounin's mind is likely
to startle the reader. But there is no fiction here ; he is
what Carlyle would have called "a terrible God's Fact."
He was a very real product of Russia's infamy, and we
need not be surprised if one with Bakounin's great tal-

THE FATHER OF TERRORISM 7

ents, worshiping Satan and preaching ideas of destruc-
tion that comprehended Cosmos itself, should have per-
formed in the world a unique and never-to-be-forgotten
role. It was inevitable that he should have stood out
among the men of his time as a strange, bewildering fig-
ure. To his very matter-of-fact and much annoyed an-
tagonist, Karl Marx, he was little more than a buffoon,
the "amorphous pan-destroyer, who has succeeded in unit-
ing in one person Rodolphe, Monte Cristo, Karl Moor,
and Robert Macaire." (11) On the other hand, to his
circle of worshipers he was a mental giant, a flaming
titan, a Russian Siegfried, holding out to all the powers
of heaven and earth a perpetual challenge to combat.
And, in truth, Bakounin's ideas and imagination covered
a field that is not exhausted by the range of mythology.
He juggled with universal abstractions as an alchemist
with the elements of the earth or an astrologist with the
celestial spheres. His workshop was the universe, his
peculiar task the refashioning of Cosmos, and he began
by declaring war upon the Almighty himself and every
institution among men fashioned after what he consid-
ered to be the absolutism of the Infinite.

It is, then, with no ordinary human being that we must
deal in treating of him who is known as the father of
terrorism. Yet, as he lived in this world and fought
with his faithful circle to lay down the principles of uni-
versal revolution, we find him very human indeed. Of
contradictions, for instance, there seems to be no end.
Although an atheist, he had an idol, Satan. Although an
eternal enemy of absolutism, he pleaded with Alexander
to become the Czar of the people. And, although he
fought passionately and superbly to destroy what he
called the "authoritarian hierarchy" in the organization
of the International, he planned for his own purpose

8 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

the most complete hierarchy that can well be imagined.
His only tactic, that of lex talionis, also worked out a
perfect reciprocity even in those common affairs to which
this prodigy stooped in order to conquer, for he seemed
to create infallibly every institution he combated and
to use every weapon that he execrated when employed
by others. The most fertile of law-givers himself, he
could not tolerate another. Pope of Popes in his little
inner circle, he could brook no rival. Machiavelli's
Prince was no richer in intrigue than Bakounin; yet he
always fancied himself, with the greatest self-compas-
sion, as the naive victim of the endless and malicious in-
trigues of others. However affectionate, generous, and
open he seemed to be with those who followed him wor-
shipfully, even they were not trusted with his secrets,
and, if he was always cunning and crafty toward his ene-
mies, he never had a friend that he did not use to his
profit. Volatile in his fitful changes toward men and
movements, rudderless as he often seemed to be in the
incoherence of his ideas and of his policies, there never-
theless burned in his soul throughout life a great flaming,
and perhaps redeeming, hatred of tyranny. At times he
would lead his little bands into open warfare upon it,
dreaming always that the world once in motion would
follow him to the end in his great work of destruction.
At other times he would go to it bearing gifts, in the
hope, as we must charitably think, of destroying it by
stealth.

In general outline, this is the father of terrorism as I
see him. How he developed his views is not entirely
clear, as very little is known of his early life, and there
are several broken threads at different periods both early
and late in his career. The little known of his youth
may be quickly told. He was born in Russia in 1814, of

THE FATHER OF TERRORISM g

a family of good position, belonging to the old nobility.
He was well educated and began his career in the army.
Shortly after the Polish insurrection had been crushed,
militarism and despotism became abhorrent to him, and
the spectacle of that terrorized country made an ever-
lasting impression upon him. In 1834 he renounced his
military career and returned to Moscow, where he gave
himself up entirely to the study of philosophy, and, as
was natural at the period, he saturated himself with
Hegel. From Moscow he went to St. Petersburg and
later to Berlin, constantly pursuing his studies, and in
1842 he published under the title, "La reaction en Alle-
magne, fragment, par un Frangais," an article ending
with the now famous line : "The desire for destruction is
at the same time a creative desire." (12) This article ap-
peared in the Deutsche Jahrbiicher, in which publication
he soon became a collaborator. The authorities, however,
were hostile to the paper, and he went into Switzerland
in 1843, oi^ly to be driven later to Paris. There he made
the acquaintance of Proudhon, "the father of anar-
chism," and spent days and nights with him discussing
the problems of government, of society, and of religion.
He also met Marx, "the father of socialism," and, al-
though they were never sympathetic, yet they came fre-
quently in friendly and unfriendly contact with each
other. George Sand, George Herwegh, Arnold Ruge,
Frederick Engels, William Weitling, Alexander Herzen,
Richard Wagner, Adolf Reichel, and many other bril-
liant revolutionary spirits of the time, Bakounin knew
intimately, and for him, as for many others, the period
of the forties was one of great intellectual development.
In the insurrectionary period that began in 1848 he
became active, but he appears to have done little note-
worthy before January, 1849, when he went secretly to

10 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

Leipsic in the hope of aiding a group of young Czechs
to launch an uprising in Bohemia. Shortly afterward
an insurrection broke out in Dresden, and he rushed
there to become one of the most active leaders of the
revolt. . It is said that he was "the veritable soul of the
revolution," and that he advised the insurrectionists, in
order to prevent the Prussians from firing upon the bar-
ricades, to place in front of them the masterpieces from
the art museum. (13) When that insurrection was
suppressed, he, Richard Wagner, and some others hur-
ried to Chemnitz, where Bakounin was captured and con-
demned to death. Austria, however, demanded his ex-
tradition, and there, for the second time, he was con-
demned to be hanged. Eventually he was handed over
to Russia, where he again escaped paying the death pen-
alty by the pardon of the Czar, and, after six years in
prison, he was banished to Siberia. Great efforts were
made to secure a pardon for him, but without success.
However, through his influential relatives, he was al-
lowed such freedom of movement that in the end he suc-
ceeded in escaping, and, returning to Europe through Ja-
pan and America, he arrived in England in 1861.

The next year is notable for the appearance of two of
his brochures, "Aux amis russes, polonais, et d, tous les
amis slaves," and "La Cause du Peuple, Romanoff, Pou-
gatchoff, ou Pestel?" One would have thought that
twelve years in prison and in Siberia would have made
him more bitter than ever against the State and the
Czar; but, curiously, these writings mark a striking de-
parture from his previous views. For almost the only
time in his life he expressed a desire to see Russia de-
velop into a magnificent "State," and he urged the Rus-
sians to drive the Tartars back to Asia, the Germans
back to Germany, and to become a free people, exclusively

THE FATHER OF TERRORISM ii

Russian. By cooperative effort between the military
powers of the Russian Government and the insurrection-
ary activities of the Slavs subjected to foreign govern-
ments, the Russian peoples could wage a war, he argued,
that would create a great united empire. The second of
the above-mentioned volumes was addressed particu-
larly to Alexander II. In this Bakounin prophesies that
Russia must soon undergo a revolution. It may come
through terrible and bloody uprisings on the part of the
masses, led by some fierce and sanguinary popular idol,
or it will come. through the Czar himself, if he should be
wise enough to assume in person the leadership of the
peasants. He declared that "Alexander II. could so
easily become the popular idol, the first Czar of the
peasants. ... By leaning upon the people he could ,
become the savior and master of the entire Slavic
world." (14) He then pictures in glowing terms a
united Russia, in which the Czar and the people will
work harmoniously together to build up a great demo-
cratic State. But he threatens that, if the Czar does not
become the "savior of the Slavic world," an avenger
will arise to lead an outraged and avenging people. He
again declares, "We prefer to follow Romanoff (the
family name of the Czar) , if Romanoff could and would
transform himself from the Petersbourgeois emperor
into the Czar of the peasants." (15) Despite much flat-
tery and ill-merited praise, the Czar refused to be con-
verted, and Bakounin rushed off the next year to Stock-
holm, in the hope of organizing a band of Russians to
enter Poland to assist in the insurrection which had
broken out there.

The next few years were spent mostly in Italy, and it
was here that he conceived his plan of a secret interna-
tional organization of revolutionists. Little is known of

12 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

how extensive this secret organization actually became,
but Bakounin said in 1864 that it included a number of
Italian, French, Scandinavian, and Slavic revolutionists.
As a scheme this secret organization is remarkable. It
included three orders: I. The International Brothers;
II. The National Brothers; III. The semi-secret, semi-
public organization of the International Alliance of So-
cial Democracy. Without Bakounin's intending it, doubt-
less, the International Brothers resembled the circle of
gods in mythology; the National Brothers, the circle of
heroes ; while the third order resembled the mortals who
were to bear the burden of the fighting. The Interna-
tional Brothers were not to exceed one hundred, and
they were to be the guiding spirits of the great revolu-
tionary storms that Bakounin thought were then immi-
nent in Europe. They must possess above all things
"revolutionary passion," and they were to be the su-
preme secret executive power of the two subordinate or-
ganizations. In their hands alone should be the making
of the programs, the rules, and the principles of the revo-
lution. The National Brothers were to be under the di-
rection of the International Brothers, and were to be
selected because of their revolutionary zeal and their
ability to control the masses. They were "to have the
devil in them." The semi-secret, semi-public organiza-
tion was to include the multitude, and sections were to
be formed in every country for the purpose of organiz-
ing the masses. However, the masses were not to know
of the secret organization of the National Brothers, and
the National Brothers were not to know of the secret
organization of the International Brothers. In order to
enable them to work separately but harmoniously, Bakou-
nin, who had chosen himself as the supreme law-giver,
wrote for each of the three orders a program of princi-

THE FATHER OF TERRORISM 13

pies, a code of rules, and a plan of methods all Us own.
The ultimate ends of this movement were not to be com-
municated to either the National Brothers or to the Alli-
ance, and the masses were to know only that which was
good for them to know, and which would not be likely
to frighten them. These are very briefly the outlines of
the extraordinary hierarchy that was to form throughout
all Europe and America an invisible network of "the real
revolutionists."

This organization was "to accelerate the universal
revolution," and what was understood by the revolution
was "the unchaining of what is to-day called the bad
passions and the destruction of what in the same lan-
guage is called 'public order.' We do not fear, we in-
voke anarchy, convinced that from this anarchy, that is
to say, from the complete manifestation of unchained
popular life, must come forth liberty, equality, justice
. . . " ( 16) It was clearly foreseen by Bakounin
that there would be opponents to anarchy among the
revolutionists themselves, and he declared : "We are the
natural enemies of these revolutionists . . . who
. . . dream already of the creation of new revolu-
tionary States." (17) It was admitted that the Brothers
could not of themselves create the revolution. All that
a secret and well-organized society can do is "to organize,
not the army of the revolution — ^the army must always
be the people — ^but a sort of revolutionary staff composed
of individuals who are devoted, energetic, intelligent, and
especially sincere friends of the people, not ambitious
nor self-conceited — capable of serving as intermediaries
between the revolutionary idea and the popular instincts.
The number of these individuals does not have to be im-
mense. For the international organization of all Europe,
one hundred revolutionists, strongly and seriously bound

14 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

together, are sufficient. Two or three hundred revolu-
tionists will be sufficient for the organization of the
largest country." (i8)

The idea of a secret organization of revolutionary
leaders proved to be wholly repugnant to many of even
the most devoted friends of Bakounin, and by 1868 the
organization is supposed to have been dissolved, because,
it was said, secrets had leaked out and the whole affair
had been subjected to much ridicule. (19) The idea
of the third order, however, that of the International
Alliance, was not abandoned, and it appears that Ba-
kounin and a number of the faithful Brothers felt hope-
ful in 1867 of capturing a great "bourgeois" congress,
called the "League of Peace and of Liberty," that had
met that year in Geneva. Bakounin, filisee Reclus, Aris-
tide Rey, Victor Jaclard, and several others in the con-
spiracy undertook to persuade the league to pass some
revolutionary resolutions. Bakounin was already a mem-
ber of the central committee of the league, and, in prepa-
ration for the battle, he wrote the manuscript afterward
published under the title, "Federalisme, Socialisme, et
Antitheologisme." But the congress of 1868 dashed their
hopes to the ground, and the revolutionists separated
from the league and founded the same day, September
2Sth, a new association, called L' Alliance Internationale
de la Democratie Socialiste. The program now adopted
by the Alliance, although written by Bakounin, expressed
quite different views from those of the International
Brothers® But it, too, began its revolutionary creed by
declaring itself atheist. Its chief and most important
work was "to abolish religion and to substitute science
for faith; and human justice for divine justice."/55Bec-
ond, it declared for "the political, economic, and social
equality of the classes" (which, it was assumed, were to

THE FATHER OF TERRORISM 15

continue to exist), and it intended to attain this end by
the destruction of government and by the abolition of
the right of inheritancei^SThird, it assailed all forms of
political action and proposed that, in place of the com-
munity, groups of producers should assume control of
all industrial processes. ^Fourth, it opposed all central-
ized organization, believing that both groups and indi-
viduals should demand for themselves complete liberty
to do in all cases whateverl they desired. (20) The
same revolutionists who a short time before had planned
a complete hierarchy now appeared irreconcilably opposed
to any form of authority. They now argued that they
must abolish not only God and every political State, but
also the right of the majority to rule. Then and then
only would the people finally attain perfect liberty.

These were the chief ideas that Bakounin wished to
introduce into the International Working Men's Asso-
ciation. That organization, founded in 1864 in London,
had already become a great power in Europe, and Ba-
kounin entered it in 1869, not only for the purpose of
forwarding the ideas just mentioned, but also in the hope
of obtaining the leadership of it. Failing in 1862 to
convert the Czar, in 1864-1867 to organize into a hier-
archy the revolutionary spirits of Europe, in 1868 to
capture the bourgeoisie, he turned in i86g to seek the
aid of the working class. On each of these occasions his
views underwent the most magical of transformations.
With more bitterness than ever he now declared war
upon the political and economic powers of Europe, but
he was unable to prosecute this war until he had de-
stroyed every committee or group in the International
which possessed, or sought to possess, any power. He
assailed Marx, Engels, and all those who he thought
wished to dominate the International. The beam in his

l6 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

own eye he saw in theirs, and he now expressed an un-
speakable loathing for all hierarchical tendencies and
authoritarian methods. The story of the great battle
between him and Marx must be left for a later chapter,
and we must content ourselves for the present with fol-
lowing the history of Bakounin as he gradually devel-
oped in theory and in practice the principles and tactics
of terrorism.

While struggling to obtain the leadership of the work-
ing classes of Western Europe, Bakounin was also busy
with Russian affairs. "I am excessively absorbed in
what is going on in Russia," he writes to a friend, April
13, 1869. "Our youth, the most revolutionary in the
world perhaps, in theory and in practice, are so stirred
up that the Government has been forced to close the uni-
versities, academies, and several schools at St. Peters-
burg, Moscow, and Kazan. I have here now a specimen
of these young fanatics, who hesitate at nothing and who
fear nothing. . . . They are admirable, ... be-
lievers without God and heroes without phrase!" (21)
He who called forth this eulogy was the young Russian
revolutionist, Sergei Nechayeff. Whether admirable or
not we shall leave the reader to judge. But, if Bakounin
bewilders one, Nechayeff staggers one. And, if Bakou-
nin was the father of terrorism, Nechayeff was its living
embodiment. He was not complex, mystical, or senti-
mental. He was truly a revolutionist without phrase,
and he can be described in the simplest words. He was a
liar, a thief, and a murderer — the incarnation of Hatred,
Malice, and Revenge, who stopped at no crime against
friend or foe that promised to advance what he was
pleased to call the revolution. Bakounin had for a long
time sought his cooperation, and now in Switzerland
they began that collaboration which resulted in the most

THE FATHER OF TERRORISM 17

extraordinary series of sanguinary revolutionary writ-
ings known to history.

In the summer of 1869 there was printed at Geneva
"Words Addressed to Students," signed by them both;
the "Formula of the Revolutionary Question"; "The
Principles of the Revolution"; and the "Publications of
the People's Tribunal" — ^the three last appearing anony-
mously. All of them counsel the most infamous doc-
trines of criminal activity. In "Words Addressed to Stu-
dents," the Russian youth are exhorted to leave the uni-
versities and go among the people. They are asked to fol-
low the example of Stenka Razin, a robber chieftain who,
in the time of Alexis, placed himself at the head of a
popular insurrection.* "Robbery," declare Bakounin
and Nechayeff, "is one of the most honorable forms of
Russian national life. The brigand is the hero, the de-
fender, the popular avenger, the irreconcilable enemy of
the State, and of all social and civil order established by
the State. He is the wrestler in life and in death against
all this civilization of officials, of nobles, of priests, and
of the crown. . . . He who does not understand
robbery can understand nothing in the history of the
Russian masses. He who is not sympathetic with it, can-
not sympathize with the popular life, and has no heart
for the ancient, unbounded sufferings of the people; he
belongs in the camp of the enemy, the partisans of the
State ... It is through brigandage only that the
vitality, passion, and force of the people are established
*This formidable peasant insurrection occurred in 1669-1671.
When Pougatchoff, a century later, in I773-I77S. urged the Cos-
sacks and serfs to insurrection against Catherine II, the Russian
people saw in him a new Stenka Razin; and they expected in
Russia, in 1869 and the following years, a third centennial ap-
parition of the legendary brigand who, in the minds of the op-
pressed people, personified revolt.

l8 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

undeniably . . . The brigand in Russia is the veri-
table and unique revolutionist — revolutionist without
phrase, without rhetoric borrowed from books, a revolu-
tionist indefatigable, irreconcilable, and irresistible in ac-
tion . , . The brigands scattered in the forests, the
cities, and villages of all Russia, and the brigands con-
fined in the innumerable prisons of the empire, form a
unique and indivisible world, strongly bound together,
the world of the Russian revolution. In it, in it alone,
has existed for a long time the veritable revolutionary
conspiracy." (22)

Once again the principles of the revolution appear to
be complete and universal destruction. "There must 'not
rest . . . one stone upon a stone.' It is necessary
to destroy everything, in order to produce 'perfect
amorphism,' for, if 'a single one of the old forms' were
preserved, it would become 'the embryo' from which
would spring all the other old social forms." (23) The
same leaflet preaches systematic assassination and de-
clares that for practical revolutionists all speculations
about the future are "cririiinal, because they hinder pure
destruction and trammel the march' of the revolution.
We have confidence only in those who show by their acts
their devotion to the revolution, without fear of torture
or of imprisonment, and we disclaim all words unless
action should follow immediately." . . . (24)
"Words have no value for us unless followed at once
by action. But all is not action that goes under that
name : for example, the modest and too-cautious organi-
zation of secret societies without some external manifes-
tations is in our eyes merely ridiculous and intolerable
child's play. By external manifestations we mean a se-
ries of actions that positively destroy something — a per-
son, a cause, a condition that hinders the emancipation

THE FATHER OF TERRORISM 19

of the people. Without sparing our lives, without paus-
ing before any threat, any obstacle, any danger, etc., we
must break into the life of the people with a series of
daring, even insolent, attempts, and inspire them with a
belief in their own power, awake them, rally them, and
drive them on to the triumph of their own cause." (25)

The most remarkable of this series of writings is "The
Revolutionary Catechism." This existed for several
years in cipher, and was guarded most carefully by
Nechayeff. Altogether it contained twenty-six articles,
classified into four sections. Here it is declared that if
the revolutionist continues to live in this world it is only
in order to annihilate it all the more surely. "The object
remains always the same: the quickest and surest way
of destroying this filthy order." . . . "For him exists
only one single pleasure, one single consolation, one re-
ward, one satisfaction: the success of the revolution.
Night and day he must have but one thought, but one
aim — implacable destruction." . . . "For this end of
implacable destruction a revolutionist can and often
must live in the midst of society, feigning to be alto-
gether different from what he really is. A revolutionist
must penetrate everywhere: into high society as well as
into the middle class, into the shops, into the church, into
the palaces of the aristocracy, into the official, military,
and literary worlds, into the third section (the secret
police), and even into the imperial palace." (26)

"All this unclean society must be divided into several
categories, the first composed of those who are con-
demned to death without delay." (Sec. 15.) . . .
"In the first place must be destroyed the men most inimi-
cal to the revolutionary organization and whose violent
and sudden death can frighten the Government the most
and break its power in depriving it of energetic and in-

20 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

telligent agents." (Sec. i6.) "The second category
must be composed of people to whom we concede life
provisionally, in order that by a series of monstrous acts
they may drive the people into inevitable revolt." (Sec.
17.) "To the third category belong a great number of
animals in high position or of individuals who are re-
markable neither for their mind nor for their energy,
but who, by their position, have wealth, connections, in-
fluence, power. We must exploit them in every possible
manner, overreach them, deceive them, and, getting hold
of their dirty secrets, make them our slaves." (Sec. 18.)
. . . "The fourth class is composed of sundry ambi-
tious persons in the service of the State and of liberals
of various shades of opinion. With them we can con-
spire after their own program, pretending to follow them
blindly. We must take them in our hands, seise their
secrets, compromise them completely, in such a way that
retreat becomes impossible for them, so as to make use
of them in bringing about disturbances in the State."
(Sec. 19.) "The fifth category is composed of doctri-
naires, conspirators, revolutionists, and of those who
babble at meetings and on paper. We must urge these
on and draw them incessantly into practical and perilous
manifestations, which will result in making the majority
of them disappear, while making some of them genuine
revolutionists." (Sec. 20.) "The sixth category is very
important. They are the women, who must be divided
into three classes: the first, frivolous women, without
mind or heart, which we must use in the same manner as
the third and fourth categories of men ; the second, the
ardent, devoted, and capable women, but who are not
ours because they have not reached a practical revolu-
tionary understanding, without phrase — we must make
use of these like the men of the fifth category; finally.

THE FATHER OF TERRORISM 21

the women who are entirely with us, that is to say, com-
pletely initiated and having accepted our program in its
entirety. We ought to consider them as the most pre-
cious of our treasures, without whose help we can do
nothing." (Sec. 21.) (27)

The last section of the "Catechism" treats of the duty
of the association toward the people. "The Society has
no other end than the complete emancipation and happi-
ness of the people, namely, of the laborers. But, con-
vinced that this emancipation and this happiness can
only be reached by means of an all-destroying popular
revolution, the Society will use every means and every
effort to increase and intensify the evils and sorrows,
which must at last exhaust the patience of the people
and excite them to insurrection en masse. By a popular
revolution the Society does not mean a movement regu-
lated according to the classic patterns of the West, which,
always restrained in the face of property and of the tra-
ditional social order of so-called civilization and morality,
has hitherto been limited merely to exchanging one form
of political organization for another, and to the creating
of a so-called revolutionary State. The only revolution
that can do any good to the people is that which utterly
annihilates every idea of the State and overthrows all
traditions, orders, and classes in Russia. With this end
in view, the Society has no intention of imposing on the
people any organization whatever coming from above.
The future organization will, without doubt, proceed
from the movement and life of the people ; but that is the
business of future generations. Our task is terrible,
total, inexorable, and universal destruction." (28)
These are in brief the tactics and principles of terror-
ism, as understood by Bakounin and Nechayeff. As
only the criminal world shared these views in any degree,

22 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

the "Catechism" ends : "We have got to unite ourselves
with the adventurer's world of the brigands, who are the
veritable and unique revolutionists of Russia." (29)

It is customary now to credit most of these writings
to Nechayeff, although Bakounin himself, I believe,
never denied that they were his, and no one can read
them without noting the ear-marks of both Bakounin's
thought and style. In any case, Nechayeff was con-
stantly with Bakounin in the spring and summer of 1869,
and the most important of these brochures were pub-
lished in Geneva in the summer of that year. And, while
it may be said for Bakounin that he nowhere else advo-
cates all the varied criminal methods advised in these
publications, there is hardly an argument for their use
that is not based upon his well-known views. Further-
more, Nechayeff was primarily a man of action, and in
a letter, which is printed hereafter, it appears that he
urgently requested Bakounin to develop some of his the-
ories in a Russian journal. Evidently, then, Nechayeff
had little confidence in his own power of expression.
We must, however, leave the question of paternity un-
decided and follow the latter to Russia, where he went
late in the summer, loaded down with his arsenal of revo-
lutionary literature and burning to put into practice the
principles of the "Catechism."

Without following in detail his devious and criminal
work, one brief tale will explain how his revolutionary
activities were brought quickly to an end. There was in
Moscow, so the story runs, a gentle, kindly, and influen-
tial member of Nechayeff's society. Of ascetic disposi-
tion, this Iwanof spent much of his time in freely edu-
cating the peasants and in assisting the poorer students.
He starved himself to establish cheap eating houses,
which became the centers of the revolutionary groups.

THE FATHER OF TERRORISM 23

The police finally closed his establishments, because
Nechayeff had placarded them with revolutionary ap-
peals. Iwanof, quite unhappy at this ending of his use-
fulness, begged Nechayeff to permit him to retire from
the secret society. Nechayeff was, however, in fear that
Iwanof might betray the secrets of the society, and he
went one night with two fellow conspirators and shot
Iwanof and threw the corpse into a pond. The police, in
following up the murder, sought out Nechayeff, who had
already fled from Russia and was hurrying back to Ba-
kounin in Switzerland.

From January until July, 1870, he was constantly with
Bakounin, but quarrels began to arise between them in
June, and Bakounin writes in a letter to Ogaref : "Our
boy (Nechayeff) is very stubborn, and I, when once I
make a decision, am not accustomed to change it. There-
fore, the break with him, on my side at least seems in-
evitable." (30) In the middle of July it was discov-
ered that Nechayeff was once more carrying out the
ethics they had jointly evolved, and, in order to make
Bakounin his slave, had recourse to all sorts of "Jesuiti-
cal maneuvers, of lies and of thefts." Suddenly he dis-
appeared from Geneva, and Bakounin and other Rus-
sians discovered that they had been robbed of all their
papers and confidential letters. Soon it was learned that
Nechayeff had presented himself to Talandier in London,
and Bakounin hastened to write to his friend an expla-
nation of their relations. "It may appear strange to you
that we advise you to repulse a man to whom we gave
letters of recommendation, written in the most cordial
terms. But these letters date from the month of May,
and there have happened since some events so serious
that they have forced us to break all connections with
Nechayeff." . . . "It is perfectly true that Nechayeff

24 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

is more persecuted by the Russian Government than any
other man. . . . It is also true that Nechayeff is one
of the most active and most energetic men that I have
ever met. When it is a question of serving what he
calls the cause, he does not hesitate, he stops at nothing,
and is as pitiless toward himself as toward all others,
That is the principal quality which attracted me to, him
and which made me for a long time seek his cooperation.
There are those who pretend that he is nothing but a
sharper, but that is a lie. He is a devoted fanatic, but
at the same time a dangerous fanatic, with whom an alli-
ance could only prove very disastrous for everyone con-
cerned. This is the reason: He first belonged to a se-
cret society which, in reality, existed in Russia. This so-
ciety exists no more ; all its members have been arrested.
Nechayeff alone remains, and alone he constitutes to-day
what he calls the 'Committee.' The Russian organiza-
tion in Russia having been destroyed, he is forced to
create a new one in a foreign country. All that was per-
fectly natural, legitimate, very useful — but the means by
which he undertakes it are detestable. . . . He will
spy on you and will try to get possession of all your se-
crets, and to do that, in your absence, left alone in your
room, he will open all your drawers, will read all your
correspondence, and whenever a letter appears interest-
ing to him, that is to say, compromising you or one of
your friends from one point of view or another, he will
steal it, and will guard it carefully as a document against
you or your friend. ... If you have presented him
to a friend, his first care will be to sow between you
seeds of discord, scandal, intrigue — in a word, to set
you two at variance. If your friend has a wife or a
daughter, he will try to seduce her, to lead her astray
and to force her away from the conventional morality

THE FATHER OF TERRORISM 25

and throw her into a revolutionary protest against so-
ciety. ... Do not cry out that this is exaggeration.
It has all been fully developed and proved. Seeing him-
self unmasked, this poor Nechayeff is indeed so child-
like, so simple, in spite of his systematic perversity, that
he believed it possible to convert me. He has even gone
so far as to beg me to consent to develop this theory in a
Russian journal which he proposed to me to establish.
He has betrayed the confidence of us all, he has stolen
our letters, he has horribly compromised us — in a word,
he has acted like a villain. His only excuse is his fa-
naticism. He is a terribly ambitious man without know-
ing it, because he has at last completely identified the
revolutionary cause with his own person. But he is not
an egoist in the worst sense of that word, because he
risks his own person terribly and leads the life of a mar-
tyr, of privations, and of unheard-of work. He is a
fanatic, and fanaticism draws him on, even to the point
of becoming an accomplished Jesuit. At moments he be-
comes simply stupid. Most of his lies are sewn with
white thread. ... In spite of this relative naivete,
he is very dangerous, because he daily commits acts,
abuses of confidence, and treachery, against which it is
all the more difficult to safeguard oneself because one
hardly suspects the possibility. With all that, Nechayeff
is a force, because he is an immense energy. It is with
great pain that I have separated from him, because the
service of our cause demands much energy, and one
rarely finds it developed to such a point." (31)

The irony of fate rarely executes itself quite so hu-
morously. Although perfectly familiar with Nechayeff's
philosophy of action for over a year, the viciousness of it
appeared to Bakounin only when he himself became a
victim. When Nechayeff arrived in London he began

26 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

the publication of a Russian journal, the Commune,
where he bitterly attacked Bakounin and his views. Early
in the seventies, he was arrested and taken back to Rus-
sia, where he and over eighty others, mostly young men
and women students, were tried for belonging to secret
societies. For the first time in Russian history the court
proceeding took place before a jury and in public. Most
of those arrested were condemned for long periods to
the mines of Siberia at forced labor, while Nechayeff
was kept in solitary imprisonment until his death, some
years laiter.

Bakounin, on the other hand, remained in Switzerland
and became the very soul of that element in Italy, Spain,
and Switzerland which fought the policies of Marx in the
International. At the same time he was training a group
of youngsters to carry out in Western Europe the prin-
ciples of revolution as laid down in his Russian publica-
tions. Over young middle-class youths, especially, Ba-
kounin's magnetic power was extraordinary, and his fol-
lowers were the faithful of the faithful. A very striking
picture of Bakounin's hsrpnotic influence over this circle
is to be found in the memoirs of Madame A. Bauler.
She tells us of some Sundays she spent with Bakounin
and his friends.

"At the beginning," she says, "being unfamiliar with
the Italian language, I did not even understand the gen-
eral drift of the conversation, but, observing the faces
of those present, I had the impression that something ex-
traordinarily grave and solemn was taking place. The
atmosphere of these conferences imbued me; it created
in me a state of mind which I shall call, for want of a
better term, an 'Stat de grace.' Faith increased ; doubts
vanished. The value of Bakounin became clear to me.
His personality enlarged. I saw that his strength was

THE FATHER OF TERRORISM 27

in the power of taking possession of human souls. Be-
yond a doubt, all these men who were listening to him
were ready to undertake anything, at the slightest word
from him. I could picture to myself another gathering,
less intimate, that of a great crowd, and I realized that
there the influence of Bakounin would be the same. Only
the enthusiasm, here gentle and intimate, would become
incomparably more intense and the atmosphere more agi-
tated by the mutual contagion of the human beings in a
crowd.

"At bottom, in what did the charm of Bakounin con-
sist? I believe that it is impossible to define it exactly.
It was not by the force of persuasion that he agitated.
It was not his thought which awakened the thought of
others. But he aroused every rebellious heart and awoke
there an 'elemental' anger. And this anger, transplen-
dent with beauty, became creative and showed to the ex-
alted thirst for justice and happiness an issue and a pos-
sibility of accomplishment. 'The desire for destruction is
at the same time a creative desire,' Bakounin has re-
peated to the end of his life." (32)

CHAPTER 11

A SERIES OF INSURRECTIONS

At the beginning of the seventies Bakounin and his
friends found opening before them a field of practical
activity. On the whole, the sixties were spent in the-
orizing, in organizing, and in planning, but with the sev-
enties the moment arrived "to unchain the hydra of revo-
lution." On the 4th of September, 1870, the Third Re-
public was proclaimed in Paris, and a few days after-
ward there were many uprisings in the other cities of
France. It was, however, only in Lyons that the Ba-
kouninists played an important part. Bakounin had a
fixed idea that, wherever there was an uprising of the
people, there he must go, and he wrote to Adolphe Vogt
on September 6 : "My friends, the revolutionary social-
ists of Lyons, are calling me there. I am resolved to take
my old bones thither and to play there what will probably
be my last game. But, as usual, I have not a sou. Can
you, I do not say lend me, but give me 500 or 400, or
300 or 200, or even 100 francs, for my voyage?" (i)
Guillaume does hot state where the money finally came
from, but Bakounin evidently raised it somehow, for he
left Locarno on September 9. The night of the nth he
spent in Neuchatel, where he conferred with Guillaume
regarding the publication of a manuscript. On the 12th
he arrived in Geneva, and two days later set out for
Lyons, accompanied by two revolutionary enthusiasts,
Ozerof and the young Pole, Valence Lankiewicz.

28

A SERIES OF INSURRECTIONS 29

Since the 4th of September a Committee of Public
Safety had been installed at the Hotel de Ville composed
of republicans, radicals, and some militants of the Inter-
national. Gaspard Blanc and Albert Richard, two inti-
mate friends of Bakounin, were not members of this
committee, and in a public meeting, September 8, Rich-
ard made a motion, which was carried, to name a stand-
ing commission of ten to act as the "intermediaries be-
tween the pieople of Lyons and the Committee of Public
Safety." Three of these commissioners, Richard, An-
drieux, and Jaclard, were then appointed to go as dele-
gates to Paris in order to come to some understanding
with the Government. Andrieux, in the days of the Em-
pire, had acquired fame as a revolutionist by proposing
at a meeting to burn the ledger of the public debt. It
seems, however, that these close and trusted friends of
Bakounin began immediately upon their arrival in Paris
to solicit various public positions remunerative to them-
selves, (2) and, although they succeeded in having Gen-
eral Cluseret sent to take command of the voluntary
corps then forming in the department of the Rhone, that
proved, as we shall see, most disastrous of all.

This is about all that had happened previous to
Bakounin's arrival in Lyons, and, when he came, there
was confusion everywhere. Even the members of the
Alliance had no clear idea of what ought to be done.
Bakounin, however, was an old hand at insurrections, and
in a little lodging house where he and his friends were
staying a new uprising was planned. He lost no time
in getting hold of all the men of action. Under his en-
ergetic leadership "public meetings were multiplied and
assumed a character of unheard-of violence. The most
sanguinary motions were introduced and welcomed with
enthusiasm. They openly provoked revolt in order to

30 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

overthrow the laws and the established order of
things." (3) On September 19 Bakounin wrote to Oga-
ref: "There is so much work to do that it turns my
head. The real revolution has not yet burst forth here,
but it will come. Everything possible is being done to
prepare for it. I am playing a great game. I hope to
see the approaching triumph." (4)

A great public meeting was held on the 24th, presided
over by Eugene Saignes, a plasterer and painter, and a
man of energy and influence among the Lyons workmen,
at which various questions relative to proposed political
changes were voted upon. But it was the following day,
the 25th, that probably the most notable event of the in-
surrection took place. "The next day, Sunday, was em-
ployed," Guillaume says, "in the drawing up and printing
of a great red placard, containing the program of the
revolution which the Central Committee of Safety of
France proposed to the people . . ." (5) The first
article of the program declares: "The administrative
and governmental machinery of the State, having become
powerless, is abolished. The people of France once again
enter into full possession of themselves." The second
article suspends "all civil and criminal courts," and re-
places them "by the justice of the people." The third
suspends "the payment of taxes and of mortgages." The
fourth declares that "the State, having decayed, can
no longer intervene in the payment of private debts."
The fifth states that "all existing municipal organizations
are broken up and rieplaced in all the federated com-
munes by Committees of Safety of France, which will
exercise all powers under the immediate control of the
people." The revolution was at last launched, and the
placard ends, "Aux Armes ! ! !" (6)

While the Bakouninists were decreeing the revolution

A SERIES OF INSURRECTIONS 31

by posters and vainly calling the people to arms, an event
occurred in Lyons which brought to them a very useful
contingent of fighters. The Lyons municipality had just
reduced the pay of the workers in the national dock
yards from three to two and a half francs a day, and,
on this account, these laborers joined the ranks of the
insurgents. On the evening of September 27 a meeting
of the Central Committee of Safety of France took
place, and there a definite plan of action for the next day
was decided upon. Velay, a tulle maker and municipal
councillor, Bakounin, and others advised an armed mani-
festation, but the majority expressed itself in favor of a
peaceful one. An executive committee composed of
eight members signed the following proclamation, drawn
up by Gaspard Blanc, which was printed during the night
and posted early the next morning: "The people of
Lyons . . . are summoned, through the organ of
their assembled popular committees, to a popular mani-
festation to be held to-day, September 28, at noon, on the
Place des Terreaux, in order to force the authority to
take immediately the most energetic and efficacious meas-
ures for the national defense." (7)

Turning again to Guillaume, we find "At noon many
thousands of men pressed together on the Place des
Terreaux. A delegation of sixteen of the national dock-
yard workmen entered the Hotel de Ville to demand of
the Municipal Council the reestablishment of their wage
to three francs a day, but the Council was not in session.
Very soon a movement began in the crowd, and a hun-
dred resolute men, Saignes at their head, forcing the
door of the Hotel de Ville, penetrated the municipal
building. Some members of the Central Committee of
Safety of France, Bakounin, Parraton, Bastelica, and
others, went in with them. From the balcony, Saignes

■J2 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

announced that the Municipal Council was to be com-
pelled to accept the program of the red proclamation of
September 26 or to resign, and he proposed to name
Cluseret general of the revolutionary army. Cluseret,
cheered by the crowd, appeared in the balcony, thanked
them, and announced that he was going to Croix-
Rousse" (the working-class district). (8) He went there,
it is true, but not to call to arms the national guards of
that quarter. Indeed, his aim appears to have been to
avoid a conflict, and he simply asked the workers "to
come down en masse and without arms." (9) In the
meantime the national guards of the wealthier quarters of
the city hastened to the Hotel de Ville and penetrated
the interior court, while the Committee of Safety of
France installed itself inside the building. There they
passed two or three hours in drawing up resolutions,
while Bakounin and others in vain protested: "We
must act. We are losing time. We are going to be in-
vaded by the national bourgeois guard. It is necessary
to arrest immediately the prefect, the mayor, and Gen-
eral Mazure." (10) But their words went unheeded.
And all the while the bourgeois guards were massing
themselves before the Hotel de Ville, and Cluseret and
his unarmed manifestants were yielding place to them.
In fact, Cluseret even persuaded the members of the
Committee of Safety to retire and those of the Municipal
Council to return to their seats, which they consented to
do.

Bakounin made a last desperate effort to save the situ-
ation and to induce the insurgents to oppose force to
force, but they would not. Even Albert Richard failed
him. The Revolutionary committee, after parleying with
the Municipal Councillors, then evacuated the Hotel de
Ville and contented itself with issuing a statement

A SERIES OF INSURRECTIONS 33

to the effect that "The delegates of the people have not
believed it their duty to impose themselves on the Mu-
nicipal Council by violence and have retired when it went
into session, leaving it to the people to fully appreciate
the situation." (11) "At the moment," says Guillaume,
"when . . . Mayor Henon, with an escort of na-
tional bourgeois guards, reentered the Hotel- de Ville, he
met Bakounin in the hall of the Pas-Perdus. The mayor
immediately ordered his companions to take him in cus-
tody and to confine him at once in an underground hid-
ing-place." (12) The Municipal Councillors then opened
their session and pledged that no pursuit should be in-
stituted in view of the happenings of the day. They
voted to reestablish the former wage of the national
dock-yard workers, but declared themselves unable to
undertake the revolutionary measures proposed by the
Committee of Safety of France, as these were outside
their legal province.

In the meantime Bakounin was undergoing an ex-
perience far from pleasant, if we are to judge from the
account which he gives in a letter written the following
day: "Some used me brutally in all sorts of ways,
jostling me about, pushing me, pinching me, twisting my
arms and hands. I must, however, admit that others
cried: 'Do not harm him.' In truth the bourgeoisie
showed itself what it is everywhere: brutal and cow-
ardly. For you know that I was delivered by some
sharpshooters who put to flight three or four times
their number of these heroic shopkeepers armed with
their rifles. I was delivered, but of all the objects which
had been stolen from me by these gentlemen I was able
to find only my revolver. My memorandum book and
my purse, which contained 165 francs and some sous,
without doubt stayed in the hands of these gentlemen.

34

VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

. . . I beg you to reclaim them in my name. You will
send them to me when you have recovered them." (13)
As a matter of fact, it was at the instance of his fol-
lower, Ozerof, that Bakounin was finally delivered.
When he came forth from the Hotel de Ville, the Com-
mittee of Safety of France and its thousands of sympa-
thizers had disappeared, and he found himself practically
alone. He spent the night at the house of a friend, and
departed for Marseilles the next day, after writing the
following letter to Palix: "My dear friend, I do not
wish to leave Lyons without having said a last word of
farewell to you. Prudence keeps me from coming to
shake hands with you for the last time. I have nothing
more to do here. I came to Lyons to fight or to die
with you. I came because I am profoundly convinced
that the cause of France has become again, at this su-
preme hour, . . . the cause of humanity. I have
taken part in yesterday's movement, and I have signed
my name to the resolutions of the Committee of Safety
of France, because it is evident to me that, after the
real and certain destruction of all the administrative and
governmental machinery, there is nothing but the imme-
diate and revolutionary action of the people which can
save France. . . . The movement of yesterday, if it
had been successful . . . could have saved Lyons
and France. ... I leave Lyons, dear friend, with a
heart full of sadness and somber forebodings. I begin
to think now that it is finished with France. .
She will become a viceroyalty of Germany. In place of
her living and real socmlism* we shall have the doc-

* Previous to 1848, socialism was used by Robert Owen and
his followers, as well as by many French idealists, to mean
phalansteries, colonies, or other voluntary communal under-
takings. Marx and Engels at first called themselves "commun-

A SERIES OF INSURRECTIONS 35

trinaire socialism of the Germans, who will say no more
than the Prussian bayonets will permit them to say. The
bureaucratic and military intelligence of Prussia, com-
bined with the knout of the Czar of St. Petersburg, are
going to assure peace and public order for at least fifty
years on the whole continent of Europe. Farewell, lib-
erty! Farewell, socialism! Farewell, justice for the
people and the triumph of humanity! All that could
have grown out of the present disaster of France. All
that would have grown out of it if the people of France,
if the people of Lyons, had wished it." (14)

The insurrection at Lyons and Bakounin's decree
abolishing the State amounted to very little in the history
of the French Republic. Writing afterward to Pro-
fessor Edward Spencer Beesly, Karl Marx comments
on the events that had taken place in Lyons : "At the
beginning everything went well," he writes. "Under the
pressure of the section of the International, the Republic
had been proclaimed at Lyons before it had been at Paris.
A revolutionary government was immediately estab-
lished, namely the Commune, composed in part of work-
men belonging to the International, in part of bourgeois
radical republicans . . . But those blunderers, Ba-
kounin and Cluseret, arrived at Lyons and spoiled every-
thing. Both being members of the International, they
had unfortunately enough influence to lead our friends
astray. The Hotel de Ville was taken, for a moment

ists," and were thus distinguished from these earlier socialists.
During the period of the International all its members began
more and more to call themselves "socialists." The word, an-
archism, was rarely used. As a matter of fact, it was the strug-
gle in the International which eventually clarified the views of
both anarchists and socialists and made clear the distinctions
now recognized between communism, anarchism, and socialism.
See Chapter VIII, infra.

36 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

only, and very ridiculous decrees on the abolition of the
State and other nonsense were issued. You understand
that the fact alone of a Russian — whom the newspapers
of the bourgeoisie represented as an agent of Bismarck-
pretending to thrust himself at the head of a Committee
of Safety of France was quite sufficient to change com-
pletely public opinion. As to Cluseret, he behaved at
once like an idiot and a ,coward. These two men left
Lyons after their failure." (15) Bakounin's so-called
abolition of the State appealed to the humor of Marx.
He speaks of it in another place in these words : "Then
arrived the critical moment, the moment longed for since
many years, when Bakounin was able to accomplish the
most revolutionary act the world has ever seen: he de-
creed the abolition of the State. But the State, in the
form and aspect of two companies of national bourgeois
guards, entered by a door which they had forgotten to
guard, swept the hall, and caused Bakounin to hasten
back along the road to Geneva." (16)

Such indeed was the humiliating and vexatious ending
of Bakounin's dream of an immediate social revolution.
His sole reward was to be jostled, pinched, and robbed.
This was perhaps most tragic of all, especially when
added to this injury there was the further indignity of
allowing the father of terrorism to keep his revolver.
The incident is one that George Meredith should have
immortalized in another of his "Tragic Comedians."
However, although the insurrection at Lyons was a com-
plete failure, the Commune of Paris was really a spon-
taneous and memorable working-class uprising. The de-
tails of that insurrection, the legislation of the Commune
itself, and its violent suppression on May 28, 1871, are
not strictly germane to this chapter, because, in fact, the
Bakouninists played no part in it. In the case of Lyons,

A SERIES OF INSURRECTIONS 37

the revolution maker was at work ; in the case of Paris,
"The working class," says Marx, "did not expect mira-
cles from the Commune. They have no ready-made
Utopias to introduce par decret du peuple. They know
that in order to work out their own emancipation, and
along with it that higher form to which present society
is irresistibly tending, by its own economic agencies, they
will have to pass through long struggles, through a series
of historic processes, transforming circumstances and
men." * But, while Marx wrote in this manner of the
Paris Commune, he evidently had in mind men of the
type of Bakounin when he declared : "In every revolu-
tion there intrude, at the side of its true agents, men of
a different stamp; some of them survivors of and de-
votees to past revolutions, . . . others mere bawlers,
who by dint of repeating year after year the same set of
stereotyped declamations against the Government of the
day have sneaked into the reputation of revolutionists
of the first water. After the i8th of March some such
men turned up, and in some cases contrived to play pre-
eminent parts. As far as their power went, they ham-
pered the real action of the working class, exactly as men
of that sort have hampered the full development of every
previous revolution. They are an unavoidable evil ; with
time they are shaken ofif ; but time was not allowed to the
Commune." (17)

The despair of Bakounin over the miserable ending of
his great plans for the salvation of France had, of course,
disappeared long before the revolution broke out iri
Spain, and he easily persuaded himself that his presence

♦This is from "The Commune of Paris," which was read
by Marx to the General Council of the International on May
30, two days after the last of the combatants of the Commune
were crushed by superior numbers on the heights of Belleville.

38 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

there was absolutely necessary to insure its success. "I
have always felt and thought," he wrote in the Memoire
justHicatif, "that the most desirable end for me would be
to fall in the midst of a great revolutionary storm." (i8)
Consequently, in the summer of the year 1873, when the
uprising gave promise of victory to the insurgents, Ba-
kounin decided that he must go and, to do so, that he
must have money. Bakounin then wrote to his wealthy
young disciple, Cafiero, in a symbolic language which
they had worked out between them, declaring his inten-
tion of going to Spain and asking him to furnish the
necessary money for his expenses. As usual, Bakounin
became melodramatic in his effort to work upon the im-
pressionable Cafiero, and, as he put it afterward in the
MSmoire justHicatif, "I added a prayer that he would be-
come the protector of my wife and my children, in case
I should fall in Spain." (19) Cafiero, who at this time
worshiped Bakounin, pleaded with him not to risk his
precious life in Spain. He promised to do everything
possible for his family in case he persisted in going, but
he sent no money, whether because he did not have it or
because he did not wish Bakounin to go is not clear.
Bakounin now wrote to Guillaume that he was greatly
disappointed not to be able to take part in the Spanish
revolution, but that it was impossible for him to do so
without money. Guillaume admits that he was not con-
vinced of the absolute necessity of Bakounin's presence
in Spain, but, nevertheless, since he desired to go there,
Guillaume offered to secure for him fifteen hundred
francs to make the journey. On the receipt of this news,
Bakounin answered Guillaume that the sum would be
wholly insufficient.

If, however, the Spanish revolution was forced to pro-
ceed without Bakounin, his influence in that country was

A SERIES OF INSURRECTIONS 39

not wanting. In the year 1873 the Spanish sections of
the International were among the largest and most nu-
merous in Europe. At the time of the congress of Cor-
dova, which assembled at the close of the year 1872,
three hundred and thirty-one sections with over twenty-
five thousand members expressed themselves in favor of
"anarchist and collectivist" principles. The trade unions
were very active, and they formed the basis of the Span-
ish movement. They had numerous organs of propa-
ganda, and the general unrest, both political and eco-
nomic, led for a time to an extraordinary development
in revolutionary ideas.

On February 11, 1873, the king abdicated and a re-
public was proclaimed. Insurrections broke out in all
parts of Spain. At Barcelona, Cartagena, Murcia,
Cadiz, Seville, Granada, and Valencia there existed a
state of civil war, while throughout the industrial dis-
tricts strikes were both frequent and violent. Demands
were made on all sides for shorter hours and increase of
wages. At Alcoy ten thousand workingmen declared a
general strike, and, when the municipal authorities op-
posed them, they took the town by storm. In some cases
the strikers lent their support to the republicans ; in other
cases they followed the ideas of Bakounin, and openly
declared they had no concern for The republic. The
changes in the government were numerous. Indeed, for
three years Spain, politically and industrially, was in a
state of chaos. At times the revolt of the workers was
suppressed with the utmost brutality. Their leaders were '
arrested, their papers suppressed, and their meetings dis-
persed with bloodshed. At other times they were allowed
to riot for weeks if the turbulence promised to aid the
intrigues of the politicians.

A lively discussion took place as to the wisdom of the

40 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

tactics employed by the anarchists in Spain. Frederick
Engels severely criticised the position of the Bakouninists
in two articles which he published in the Volksstaat. He
reviewed the events that had taken place during the sum-
mer of 1873, and he condemned the folly of the anar-
chists, who had refused to cooperate with the other revo-
lutionary forces in Spain. In his opinion, the workers
were simply wasting their energy and lives in pursuit
of a distant and unattainable end. "Spain is a country
so backward industrially," he wrote, "that it cannot be a
question there of the immediate complete emancipation
of the workers. Before arriving at that stage, Spain will
still have to pass through diverse phases of development
and struggle against a whole series of obstacles. The re-
public furnished the means of passing through ' these
phases most rapidly and of removing these obstacles
most quickly. But, to accomplish that, the Spanish
proletariat would have had to launch boldly into active
politics. The mass of the working people realized this,
and everywhere demanded that they should take part in
what was happening, that they should profit by the op-
portunities to act, instead of leaving, as formerly, the
field free to the action and intrigues of the possessing
classes. The government ordered elections for the Cor-
tes members. What position should the International
take ? The leaders of the Bakouninists were in the great-
est dilemma. A continued political inactivity appeared
more ridiculous and more impossible from day to day.
The workers wanted to 'see deeds.' On the other hand,
the alliancistes (Bakouninists) had preached for years
that one ought not to take part in any revolution that
had not for its end the immediate and entire emancipa*
tion of the workers, that participation in any political
action constituted an acceptance of the principle of the

A SERIES OF INSURRECTIONS 41

State, that source of all evil, and that especially taking
part in any election was a mortal sin." (20)

The anarchists were of course very bitter over this
attack on their policies, and they concluded that the so-
cialists had become reactionaries who no longer sought
the emancipation of the working class. They were more
than incensed at the reference Engels had made to an
act of the insurgents of Cartagena, who, in order to gain
allies in their struggle, had armed the convicts of a
prison, "eighteen hundred villains, the most dangerous
robbers and murderers of Spain." (21) According to
Engels' information, this infamous act had been under-
taken upon the advice of Bakounin, but, whether or not
that is true, it was a fatal mistake that brought utter dis-
aster to the insurgents.

Certainly of this fact there can be no question — the
divisions among the revolutionary forces in Spain, which
Engels deplored, resulted, after many months of fighting,
in returning to power the most reactionary elements in
Spain. And this was foreseen, as even before the end
of the summer Bakounin had despaired of success. In
his opinion, the Spanish revolution miscarried miserably,
"for want," as he afterward wrote, "of energy and revo-
lutionary spirit in the leaders as well as in the masses.
And all the rest of the world was plunged," he lamented,
"into the most dismal reaction." (22)

France and Spain, having now failed to launch the
universal revolution, Bakounin's hopes turned to Italy,
where a series of artificial uprisings among the almost
famished peasants was being stirred up by his followers.
Their greatest activity was during the first two weeks in
August of the next year, 1874, and the three main cen-
ters were Bologna, Romagna, and Apulia. In spite of
the fact that the followers of Mazzini were opposed to

42 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

the International, an attempt was made in the summer of
1874 by some Italian socialists (Celso Cerretti among
others), to effect a union in order that by common action
they might work more advantageously against the mon-
archy. Garibaldi, to whom these socialists appealed, at
first disapproved of any reconciliation with Bakounin
and his friends, but later allowed himself to be per-
suaded. A meeting of the Mazzinian leaders to discuss
the matter convened August 2 at the village of Ruffi.
The older members were opposed to all common action,
while the younger elements desired it. However, before
an agreement was reached, twenty-eight Mazzinians were
arrested, among them Saffi, Fortis, and Valzania. Three
days later, the police succeeded in arresting Andrea
Costa, for whom they had been searching for more than
a year on account of his participation in the Interna-
tional congress at Geneva. Although these events were
something of a setback, the revolutionists decided that
they had gone too far to retreat. It was then that Ba-
kounin wrote: "And now, my friends, there remains
nothing more for me but to die. Farewell!" (23) On
the way to Italy he wrote to his friend, Guillaume, say-
ing good-by to him and announcing, without explana-
tion, that he was journeying to Italy to take part in a
struggle from which he would not return alive. On his
arrival in that country, however, he carefully concealed
himself in a small house where only the revolutionary
"intimates" could see him.

The nights of August 7 and 8 had been chosen for the
insurrection which was to burst forth in Bologna and
thence to ei^end, first to Romagna, and afterward to the
Marches and Tuscany. A group of Bologna insurgents;
reinforced by about three thousand others from Ro-'
magna, were to enter Bologna by the San Felice gate.

A SERIES OF INSURRECTIONS

43

Another group would enter the arsenal, the doors of
which would be opened by two non-commissioned offi-
cers, and take possession of the arms and ammunition,
carrying them to the Church of Santa Annunziata, where
all the guns should be stored. At certain places in the
city material was already gathered with which to impro-
vise barricades. One hundred republicans had promised
to take part in the movement, not as a group, but indi-
vidually. On the 7th copies of the proclamation of the
Italian Committee for the Social Revolution were dis-
tributed throughout the city, calling the masses to arms
and urging the soldiers to make common cause with the
people. During the nights of the 7th and 8th, groups
from Bologna assembled at the appointed places of meet-
ing outside the walls, but the Romagna comrades did not
come, or at least came in very small numbers. Those
from Imola were surrounded in their march, some being
arrested and others being forced to retreat. At dawn
the insurgents who had gathered under the walls of Bo-
logna dispersed, some taking refuge in the mountains.
Bakounin had been alone during the night, and became
convinced that the insurrection had failed. He was try-
ing to make up his mind to commit suicide, when his
friend, Silvio, arrived and told him that all was not lost
and that perhaps other attempts might yet be made. The
following day Bakounin was removed to another retreat
of greater safety, as numerous arrests had been made at
Bologna, Imola, Romagna, the Marches, as well as in
Florence, Rome, and other parts of Italy.

About the same time a conspiracy similar to that un-
dertaken at Bologna was launched by Enrico Malatesta
and some friends in Apulia. A heavy chest of guns had
been dispatched from Tarentum to a station in the prov-
ince of Bari, from which it was carried on a cart to the

44

VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

old chateau of Castel del Monte, which had been chosen
as the rendezvous. "Many hundreds of conspirators,"
Malatesta recounts, "had promised to meet at Castel del
Monte. I arrived, but of all those who had sworn to be
there we found ourselves six. No matter. We opened
the box of arms and found it was filled with old per-
cussion guns, but that made no difference. We armed
ourselves and declared war on the Italian army. We
roamed the country for some days, trying to gain over
the peasants, but meeting with no response. The second
day we met eight carabinieri, who opened fire on us and
imagined that we were very numerous. Three days
later we discovered that we were surrounded by soldiers.
There remained only one thing to do. We buried the
guns and decided to disperse. I hid myself in a load of
hay, and thus succeeded in escaping from the dangerous
region." (24) An attempt at insurrection also took
place in Romagna, but it appears to have been limited
to cutting the telegraph wires between Bologna and
Imola.

Back of all the Italian riots lay a serious economic
condition. The peasants were in very deep distress, and
it was not difficult for the Bakouninists to stir them to
revolt. The Bulletin of the Jura Federation of August
16 informs us: "During the last two years there have
been about sixty riots produced by hunger ; but the riot-
ers, in their ignorance, only bore a grudge against the
immediate monopolists, and did not know how to discern
the fundamental causes of their misery." (25) This is
all too plainly shown in the events of 1874. Beyond giv-
ing the Bakouninists a chance to play at revolution, there
is little significance in the Italian uprisings of that year!

The failure of the various insurrections in France,
Spain, and Italy was, naturally enough, discouraging to

A SERIES OF INSURRECTIONS 45

Bakounin and his followers. The Commune of Paris
was the one uprising that had made any serious impres-
sion upon the people, and it was the one wherein the
Bakouninists had played no important part. The others
had failed miserably, with no other result than that of
increasing the power of reaction, while discouraging and
disorganizing the workers. Even Bakounin had now
reached the point where he was thoroughly disillusioned,
and he wrote to his friends that he was exhausted, dis-
heartened, and without hope. He desired, he said, to with-
draw from the movement which made him the object of
the persecutions of the police and the calumnies of the
jealous. The whole world was in the evening of a black
reaction, he thought, and he wrote to the truest and most
devoted of all that loyal circle of Swiss workmen, James
Guillaume, that the time for revolutionary struggles was
past and that Europe had entered into a period of pro-
found reaction, of which the present generation would
probably not see the end. "He urged me," relates Guil-
laume, "to imitate himself and 'to make my peace with
the bourgeoisie.' " (26) "It is useless," are Bakounin's
words, "to wish obstinately to obtain the impossible. It
is necessary to recognize reality and to realize that, for
the moment, the popular masses do not wish socialism.
And, if some tipplers of the mountains desire on this ac-
count to accuse you of treason, you will have for yourself
the witness of your conscience and the esteem of your
friends." (27)

In July, 1873, Bakounin retired to an estate that had
been bought for him through the generosity of Cafiero,
on the route from Locarno to Bellinzona, and for the
next few months lavish expenditures were made in the
construction and reconstruction of an establishment
where the "intimates" could be entertained. That fall

46 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

Bakounin wrote to the Jura Federation, announcing his
retreat from public life and requesting it to accept his
resignation. "For acting in this way," he wrote, "I have
many reasons. Do not believe that it is principally on
account of the personal attacks of which I have been
made the object these last years. I do not say that I am
absolutely insensible to such. However, I would feel
myself strong enough to resist them if I thought that my
further participation in your work and in your struggles
could aid in the triumph of the cause of the proletariat.
But I do not think so.

"By my birth and my personal position, and doubtless
by my s)rmpathies and my tendencies, I am only a bour-
geois, and, as such, I could not do anything else among
you but propaganda. Well, I have a conviction that the
time for great theoretical discourses, whether printed or
spoken, is past. In the last nine years there have been
developed within the International more ideas than would
be necessary to save the world, if ideas alone could save
it, and I defy anybody to invent a new one." (28)

This letter in reality marks the end of Bakounin's ac-
tivity in the revolutionary movement. After squandering
most of Cafiero's fortune, Bakounin sought a martyr's
death in Italy, but in this, as in all his other exploits, he
was unsuccessful. And from that time on to his death
his life is a humiliating story as he sought here and there
the necessary money for his livelihood. Nearly always
he had been forced to live from hand to mouth. Money,
money, money was the burden of hundreds of his let-
ters. In order to obtain funds he had resorted to almost
every possible plan. He had accepted money in advance
from publishers for books which he had never had time
to write. From time to time he would find an almoner to
care for him, only in the end to lose him through his

A SERIES OF INSURRECTIONS 47

importunate and exacting demands. An account is given
by Guillaume of what I believe is the last meeting be-
tween Bakounin and certain of his old friends in Septem-
ber, 1874. Ross, Cafiero, Spichiger, and Guillaume met
Bakounin in a hotel at Neuchatel. Guillaume, it appears,
was cold and unfeeling; Cafiero and Ross said nothing,
while Spichiger wept silently in a corner. "The explicit
declaration made by me . . . " says Guillaume, "took
away from Bakounin at the very beginning all hope of a
change in our estimation of him. It was also a question
of money in this last interview. We offered to assure to
our old friend a monthly pension of 300 francs, express-
ing the hope that he would continue to write, but he re-
fused to accept anything. As a set-off, he asked Cafiero
to loan him 3,000 francs (no longer 5,000), . . .
and Cafiero replied that he would do it. Then we sepa-
rated sadly." (29)

On the first of July, 1876, Bakounin, after a brief ill-
ness, died at Bern at the house of his old friend, Dr.
Vogt. The press of Europe printed various comments
upon his life and work. The anarchists wrote their eulo-
gies, while the socialists generally deplored the ruinous
and disrupting tactics that Bakounin had employed in the
International Working Men's Association. This story
will be told later, but it is well to mention here that
since 1869 an unbridgeable chasm had opened itself l)e-|
tween the anarchists and the socialists. When they first
came together in the International there was no clear
distinction between them, but, after Bakounin was ex-
pelled from that organization in 1872, at The Hague, his
followers frankly called themselves anarchists, while the
followers of Marx called themselves socialists. In prin-
ciples and tactics they were poles apart, and the bitter-
ness between them was at fever heat. The anarchists!

48 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

took the principles of Bakounin and still further elabo-
rated them, while his methods were developed from con-
spiratory insurrections to individual acts of violence.
While the idea of the Propaganda of the Deed is to be
found in the writings of Bakounin and Nechayeff, it was
left to others to put into practice that doctrine. For the
next thirty years the principles and ideals of anarchism
made no appreciable headway, but the deeds of the anar-
chists became the talk and, to a degree, the terror of
the world.

CHAPTER III

THE PROPAGANDA OF THE DEED

The insurrections in France and Spain were on the
whole spontaneous uprisings, but those disturbances in
Italy in which the anarchists played a part were largely
the result of agitation. Of course, adverse political and
economic conditions were the chief causes of that gen-
eral spirit of unrest which was prevalent in the early
seventies in all the Latin countries, but after 1874 the
numerous riots in which the anarchists were active were
almost entirely the work of enthusiasts who believed they
could make revolutions. The results of the previous up-
risings had a terribly depressing effect upon nearly all the
older men, but there were four youths attached to Ba-
kounin's insurrectionary ideas whose spirits were not
bowed down by what had occurred. Carlo Cafiero, En-
rico Malatesta, Paul Brousse, and Prince Kropotkin
were at the period of life when action was a joyous thing,
and they undertook to make history. Cafiero we know as
a young Italian of very wealthy parents. Malatesta "had
left the medical profession and also his fortune for the
sake of the revolution." (i) Paul Brousse was of
French parentage, and had already distinguished himself
in medicine, but he cast it aside in his early devotion to
anarchism. He had rushed to Spain when the revolution
broke out there, and he was always ready to go where-
ever an opportunity offered itself for revolutionary activ-
ity. The Russian prince, Kropotkin, the fourth member

5o VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

of the group, was a descendant of the Ruriks, and it was
said sometimes, in jest, that he had more right to the
Russian throne than Czar Alexander II. The fascinating
story of his Hfe is, told in the "Memoirs of a Revolu-
tionist," but modesty forbade him to say that no one
since Bakounin has exercised so great an influence as
himself over the principles and tactics of anarchism.
Kropotkin first visited Switzerland in 1872, when he
came in close contact with the men of the Jura Federa-
tion. A week's stay with the Bakouninists converted
hitn, he says, to anarchism. (2) He then returned to
St. Petersburg, and shortly after entered the famous
circle of Tchaykovsky, and, as a result of his revolution-
ary activity, he was arrested and imprisoned in the
Fortress of St. Peter and St. Paul. After his thrilling
escape from prison, in 1876, Kropotkin returned to
Switzerland, and for several years gave himself up en-
tirely to the cause of anarchism. These four young men,
all far removed by training and position from the work-
ing class, after the death of Bakounin, devised the Propa-
ganda of the Deed, a method of agitation that was
destined to become famous throughout the world.

Hitherto the Bakouninists had all been firmly con-
vinced that the masses were ready to rise at a moment's
notice in order to tear down the existing governments.
They were obsessed with the idea that only a spark was
needed to set the whole world into a general conflagra-
tion. But repeated failures taught them that the masses
were inclined to make very little sacrifice for the sake of
communism and that stupendous eflforts were needed to
create a revolution. It appeared to them, therefore, that
the propaganda of words and of theories was of little
avail. Consequently, these four youths, with their
friends, set out to spread knowledge by acts of violence.

THE PROPAGANDA OF THE DEED 51

Of course, they had not entirely given up the hope that
a minority could, by a series of well-planned assaults,
gradually sweep in after them the masses. But even
should they fail in that, they felt that they must strike at
the enemy, though they stood alone. Whatever hap-
pened, they argued, the acts themselves would prove of
great propaganda value. Even the trials would enable
them to use the courts as a tribune, and the bourgeois
press itself would print their words and spread through-
out the world their doctrines.

In the Bulletin of the Jura Federation, December 3,
1876, Cafiero and Malatesta wrote : "The great majority
of Italian socialists are grouped about the program of the
Italian Federation — a program which is anarchist, col-
lectivist, and revolutionary. And the small number who,
up to the present, have remained on the outside — ^the
dupes of intrigues and lies — are all beginning to enter our
organization. We do not refer to a small group who, in-
fluenced by personal considerations and reactionary ends,
are trying to establish a propaganda which they call
'gradual and peaceful.' These have already been judged
in the opinion of the Italian socialists and represent noth-
ing but themselves.

"The Italian Federation believes that the insurrec-
tionary deed, destined to affirm socialist principles by
acts, is the most efficacious means of propaganda." (3)
The next year Paul Brousse originated the famous
phrase, the Propaganda of the Deed. He reviews in the
Bulletin the various methods of propaganda which had
previously been employed. "Propaganda from indi-
vidual to individual, propaganda by mass meeting or con-
ference, propaganda by newspaper, pamphlet, or book — ■
these means," he declares, "are adapted only to theoreti-
cal propaganda. Besides, they become more and more

52 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

difficult to employ in any efficacious fashion in the pres-
ence of those means possessed by the bourgeoisie, with
its orators, trained at the bar and knowing how to
wheedle the popular assemblies, and with its venal press
which calumniates and disguises everything." (4) In
the opinion of Brousse, the workers, "laboring most of
the time eleven and twelve hours a day . . . return
home so exhausted by fatigue that they have little desire
to read socialist books and newspapers." (5) Rejecting
thus all other methods of propaganda, Brousse con-
cludes that "the Propaganda of the Deed is a powerful
means of awakening the popular conscience." (6)

Kropotkin was even more enthusiastic over this new
method of education. "A single deed," he declared,
"makes more propaganda in a few days than a thousand
pamphlets. The government defends itself, it rages piti-
lessly; but by this it only causes further deeds to be
committed by one or more persons, and drives the in-
surgents to heroism. One deed brings forth another;
opponents join the mutiny; the government splits into
factions; harshness intensifies the conflict; concessions
come too late; the revolution breaks out." (7) Here at
last is the famous Propaganda of the Deed, destined to
such tragic ends. It owes its inspiration, of course, to
the teachings of Bakounin, and we find among these
youths the same contempt for words and theories that
Bakoimin himself had, and they proposed, in the words
of Bakounin, "to destroy something — a person, a cause,
a condition that hinders the emancipation of the peo-
ple." (8) Consequently, they undertook immediately to
carry into eflEect these new theories of propaganda, and
during the year 1877 they organized two important dem-
onstrations, the avowed purpose of which was to show
anarchism in action.

THE PROPAGANDA OF THE DEED 53

The first event, which occurred at Bern, March 18,
under the leadership of Paul Brousse, was a manifesta-
tion to celebrate the anniversary of the proclamation of
the Commune. All the members of the Jura Federation
were invited to take part, and the red flag was to be un-
furled. Among the most conspicuous in this demonstra-
tion were Brousse, Werner, Chopard, Schwitzguebel,
Kropotkin, Pindy, Jeallot, Ferre, Spichiger, Guillaume,
and George Plechanoff, recently arrived from St. Peters-
burg. The participants became mixed up in a violent
affray in the streets, blows were exchanged between them
and the police, but in the effort to tear away the red
flags many of the gendarmes were wounded. The climax
came on August 16 of the same year, when twenty-five
of the manifestants appeared before the correctional tri-
bunal of Bern, accused "(i) of participation in a brawl
with deadly instruments, (2) of resisting, by means of
force, the employees of the police." Most of the pris-
oners were condemned to imprisonment, the terms vary-
ing from ten days to two months. James Guillaume was
condemned to forty days, Brousse to a month. The lat-
ter and five other convicted foreigners were also ban-
ished for three years from the canton of Bern. (9)

The second of these demonstrations took place in
April in the form of an insurrectionary movement of the
Internationalists of Italy. They chose the massive group
of mountains which border on the Province of Benevent
for the scene of their operations, and made Naples their
headquarters. During the whole of the preceding win-
ter they were occupied in making their preparations, and
endeavoring to gain the support of the peasants of the
near-by villages. They instructed all those who joined
their cause from Emilia, Romagna, and Tuscany to be
ready for action the beginning of April, as soon as the

54 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

snow disappeared from the summits of the Apennines.
According to information furnished by Malatesta to
Guillaume, on April 6 and 7 they journeyed from San
Lupo (Province of Benevent) into the region at the south
of the Malta Mountains (Province of Caserte). On
the 8th they attacked the communes of Letino and Gallo,
burned the archives of the first named, pillaged the treas-
ury of the preceptor, and burned the parish house of the
second. On the 9th and loth they tried to penetrate the
other communes, but in vain, for they found them all
occupied by troops sent directly by the government to
oppose them. Their provisions were exhausted, and they
would have bought a fresh supply in the village of
Venafro, only the soldiers gave the alarm and pursued
the band as far as a wood, in which they hid themselves.
All of the nth was spent in a long march through rain
and snow. The jaded band was finally surprised and
captured in a sheepfold, where they had sought shelter
for that night. Two of the revolutionists escaped, but
were recaptured a short time afterward. They were con-
fined in the prison of Santa-Maria Capua Visere, to the
number of thirty-seven, among them being Cafiero, Mala-
testa, Ceccarelli,.Lazzari, Fortini (cure of Letino), Tom-
burri Vincenzo (cure of Gallo), Stamari, and others.
On December 30 the Chamber of Arraignment of Naples
rendered its decision. The two priests and a man who
had served as guide to the insurgents were exempted
from punishment, but the thirty-four others were sent
before the court of assizes on the charge of conspiracy
against the security of the State. As these were politi-
cal crimes, which were covered by a recent amnesty,
there remained only the murder of a carabineer, of which
the court of assizes of Benevent finally acquitted Ca-
fiero, Malatesta, and their friends in August, 1878. (10)

THE PROPAGANDA OF THE DEED 55

By the above series of events the Propaganda of the
Deed was launched, and from this day on it became a
recognized method of propaganda. Neither money, nor
organization, nor literature was any longer absolutely
necessary. One human being in revolt with torch or
dynamite was able to instruct the world. Bakounin and
NechayeflE had written their principles, and had, in fact,
in some measure, endeavored to carry them into effect.
But the Propaganda of the Deed was no more evolved as
a principle of action than these four daring youths put
it into practice. In the next few years it became.the chief
expression of anarchism, and little by little it made the
very name of anarchism synonymous with violence and
crime. Surely these four zealous youths could hardly
have devised a method of propaganda that could have
served more completely to defeat their purpose.

The year 1878 witnessed a series of violent acts which
brought in their train serious consequences. In that year
an attempt was made upon the life of King Humbert
of Italy; and, while driving in Berlin with his daughter,
the Grand Duchess of Baden, Emperor William was shot
at by a half-witted youth named Hodel. Three weeks
later Dr. Karl Nobiling fired at the Emperor from an
upper window overlooking the Unter den Linden. These
assaults were made to serve as the pretext for a series of
brutally repressive measures against the German social-
ists, although the authorities were unable to connect
either Hodel or Nobiling with the anarchists or with the
socialists. An excellent opportunity, however, had arrived
to deal a crushing blow to socialism, and "Bismarck used
his powerful influence with the press," August Bebel
says, "in order to lash the public into a fanatical hatred
of the social-deiriocratic party. Others who had an in-
terest in the defeat of the party joined in, especially a

56 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

majority of the employers. Henceforth our opponents
spoke of us exclusively as the party of assassins, or the
'Ruin air party — a party that wished to rob the masses
of their faith in God, the monarchy, the family, mar-
riage, and property." (ii) The attempt to destroy the
German socialist organization was only one of the many
repressive measures that were taken by the governments
of Europe in the midst of the panic. To the terrorism
of the anarchists the governments responded by a terror-
ism of repression, and this in itself helped to establish
murderous assaults as a method of propaganda:

Up to this time Germany had been comparatively free
from anarchist teachings. A number of the Lassalleans
had advocated violent methods. Hasselmann had several
years before launched the Red Flag, which advocated
much that was not in harmony with socialism, and even-
tually the German socialist congress requested him to
cease the publication of his paper. A few individuals
without great influence had endeavored at various times
to import Bakounin's philosophy and methods into Ger-
many, but their propaganda bore no fruit whatever. It
was only when the German Government began to imi-
tate the terrorism of the Russian bureaucracy that a mo-
mentary passion for retaliation arose among the social-
ists. In fact, a few notable socialists went over to an-
archism, frankly declaring their belief in terrorist tac-
tics. And one of the most striking characters in the
history of terrorism, Johann Most, was a product of Bis-
marck's man-hunting policies and legal tyranny. Never-
theless, those policies failed utterly to provoke the ex-
tensive retaliation which Bismarck expected, although it
was a German who, after five attempts had been made
on the life of Czar Alexander II. of Russia — the last be-
ing successful — proposed at an anarchist congress in

THE PROPAGANDA OF THE DEED 57

Paris, in 1881, the forcible removal of all the potentates
of the earth. This was rejected by the Paris conference
as "at present not yet suitable," (12) although the idea
proved attractive to some anarchists who even believed
that a few daring assaults could so terrify the royal fam-
ilies of Europe that they would be forced to abdicate
their power.

During the same period the anarchist movement was
developing in Austria-Hungary. A number of anarchist
newspapers were launched, and a ceaseless agitation was
in progress under the guidance of Peukert, Stellmacher,
and Kammerer. Host's Freiheit was smuggled into the
country in large quantities and was read greedily. At the
trial of Merstallinger it was shown that the money for
anarchist agitation was obtained by robbery. This dis-
covery added to the bitterness of the fight going on be-
tween the socialists and the anarchists. The anarchists,
however, overpowered their opponents, and everywhere
secret printing presses were busily producing incendiary
literature which advocated the murder of police officials
and otherwise developed the tactics of terrorism. "At a
secret conference at Lang Enzersdorf," says Zenker, "a
new plan of action was discussed and adopted, namely, to
proceed with all means in their power to take action
against "exploiters and agents of authority,' to keep peo-
ple in a state of continual excitement by such acts of ter-
rorism, and to bring about the revolution in every possi-
ble way. This program was immediately acted upon in
the murder of several police agents. On December 15,
1883, at Floridsdorf, a police official named Hlubek was
murdered, and the condemnation of Rouget, who was (
convicted of the crime, on June 23, 1884, was imme- \
diately answered the next day by the murder of the po- '
lice agent Bloct. The Government now took energetic

58 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

measures. By order of the Ministry, a state of siege was
proclaimed in Vienna and district from January 30, 1884,
by which the usual tribunals for certain crimes and
offences were temporarily suspended, and the severest
repressive measures were -exercised against the anar-
chists, so that anarchism in Austria rapidly declined, and
at the same time it soon lost its leaders. Stellmacher and
Kammerer were executed, Peukert escaped to England,
most of the other agitators were fast in prison, the jour-
nals were suppressed and the groups broken up." (13)

While these events were taking place in Austria, anar-
chist agitation was manifesting itself in several great
strikes that broke out in the industrial centers of South-
ern France. At Lyons, Fournier, who shot his employer
in the open street, was honored in a public meeting by the
presentation of a revolver. A great demonstration was
planned for Paris, but, as there happened to be a review
of troops on the day set, the anarchists decided to aban-
don the demonstration. In the autumn of the same year
(1882), troubles arose in Monceau-les-Mines and at
Blanzy, where the workers were bent under a terrible
capitalist and clerical domination. Under the circum-
stances, the anarchist propaganda was very welcome, and
it was only a short time until it produced an anti-religious
demonstration. Three or four hundred men, armed with
pitchforks and revolvers, spread over the country, break-
ing the crosses and the statues of the Virgin which
were placed at the junctions of the roads. They called
the working classes to arms and took as hostages land-
lords, cures, and functionaries. These riots were the
childlike manifestations of exasperated and miserable
men, destined in advance to failure. Numerous arrests
followed, and in the mines the workers suffered increased
oppression.

THE PROPAGANDA OF THE DEED 59

In 1882 the great silk industry of Lyons was undergo-
ing a serious crisis, and the misery among the weavers
was intense. The anarchists were carrying on a big agi-
tation led by Kropotkin, Gautier, Bordas, Bernard, and
others. In the center of this city reduced almost to
starvation there was, says Kropotkin, an "underground
cafe at the Theatre Bellecour, which remained open all
night, and where, in the small hours of the morning, one
could see newspaper men and politicians feasting and
drinking in company with gay women. Not a meeting
was held but some menacing allusion was made to that
cafe, and one night a dynamite cartridge was exploded
in it by an unknown hand. A worker who was occa-
sionally there, a socialist, jumped to blow out the lighted
fuse of the cartridge, and was killed, while a few of the
feasting politicians were slightly wounded. Next day a
dynamite cartridge was exploded at the doors of a re-
cruiting bureau, and it was said that the anarchists in-
tended to blow up the huge statue of the Virgin which
stands on one of the hills of Lyons." (14) A panic
seized the wealthier classes of the city, and some sixty
anarchists were arrested, including Kropotkin. A great
trial, known as the Proces des Anarchistes de Lyons, en-
sued, which lasted many weeks. At the conclusion only
three out of the entire number were acquitted. Although
nearly all the anarchists were condemned, the police of
Lyons were still searching for the author of the explo-
sion. At last, Cyvoct, a militant anarchist of Lyons, was
identified as the one who had thrown the bomb. Cyvoct
had first gone to Switzerland, then to Brussels, in the
suburbs of which city he was finally arrested. He was
given over to the French police, appeared before the
court of assizes of the Rhone, and was condemned to

6o VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

death. His sentence was afterward commuted to that of
enforced labor, and in 1897 he was pardoned.

On March 29, 1883, the carpenters' union of Paris
called the unemployed to a meeting to be held on the
Esplanade des Invalides. Two groups of anarchists
formed. One started toward the £lysee and was scat-
tered on its way by the police. The second went toward
the suburb of Saint-Antoine. On the march many baker-
ies were robbed by the manifestants. Arrived at Place
Maubert, they clashed with a large force of police. As
a result, many arrests were made. Accused of inciting
to pillage, Louise Michel and fimile Pouget were con-
demned to several years' imprisonment. The same
month, at Monceau-les-Mines and in Paris, great dem-
onstrations of the "unemployed" took place in the streets,
combined with robbery and dynamite outrages, while in
July there were sanguinary encounters with the armed
forces in Roubaix and elsewhere. Again and again the
populace was incited to rise against the bourgeoisie,
"who (it was said) were indulging in festivities while
they had condemned Louise Michel, the champion of the
proletariat, to a cruel imprisonment." (15)

These are but a few instances of the activity of the
anarchists at the end of the seventies and at the begin-
ning of the eighties. They are perhaps sufficient to show
that the Propaganda of the Deed was making headway
in Western Europe. Certainly in Germany and Austria
its course was soon run, but in France, Italy, Spain, and
even in Belgium every strike was attended with violence.
Insurrections, dynamite outrages, assassinations — all
played their part. At the same time the governments
carried on a ferocious persecution, and the chief anar-
chists were driven from place to place and hunted as
wild animals. Police spies and agents provocateurs

THE PROPAGANDA OF THE DEED 6l

swarmed over the labor, socialist, and anarchist move-
ments, and at the slightest sign of an uprising the sol-
diers were brought out to shoot down the people. Hardly
a month went by without some "anarchist trouble," and
many harmless strikes resulted in dreadful massacres.
It was a tragic period, that reminds one again of the pic-
ture in Dante in which the two bitter enemies inflict
upon each other cruel wounds in a fight that on both
sides was inspired by the deepest hatred.

CHAPTER IV

JOHANN MOST IN AMERICA

While the above events were transpiring in the Latin
countries, the Bakouninists were keeping a sharp eye
on America as a land of hopeful possibilities. As early
as 1874 Bakounin himself considered the matter of com-
ing here, while Kropotkin and Guillaume followed with
intei;est the labor disturbances that were at that time so
numerous and so violent in this country. The panic of
1873 had caused widespread suffering among the working
classes. For several years afterward hordes of unem-
ployed tramped the country. The masses were driven
to desperation and, in their hunger, to frequent out-
breaks of violence. When later a measure of prosperity
returned, both the trade-union and the socialist move-
ments began to attract multitudes of the discontented.
The news of two important events in the labor world of
America reached the anarchists of the Jura and filled
them, Guillaume says, "with a lively emotion." In June,
1877, Kropotkin called attention to the act of the Su-
preme Court of the United States in declaring unconsti-
tutional the eight-hour law on Government work. He
was especially pleased with an article in the Labor Stand-
ard of New York, which declared : "This will teach the
workers not to put their confidence in Congress and to
trust only in their own efforts. No law of Congress
could be of any use to the worker if he is not so organ-
ized that he can enforce it. And, if the workers are

62

JOHANN MOST IN AMERICA 63

strong enough to do that, if they succeed in solidly form-
ing the federation of their trade organizations, then they
will be able, not only to force the legislators to make
efficacious laws on the hours of work, on inspection, etc.,
but they will also be able to make the law themselves,
deciding that henceforth no worker in the country shall
work more than eight hours a day." "It is the good,
practical sense of an American which says that," (i)
comments Kropotkin. This act of the Supreme Court
and this statement of the Labor Standard were very wel-
come news to the anarchists. They were convinced that
the Americans had abandoned political action and were
turning to what they had already begun to call "direct
action."

Another event, a month later, added to this conviction.
In its issue of July 29 the Bulletin published this article :
" 'Following a strike of the machinists of the Baltimore
& Ohio Railroad, a popular insurrection has burst forth
in the states of Maryland, West Virginia, Pennsylvania,
and Ohio. If at Martinsburg (West Virginia) the work-
men have been conquered by the militia, at Baltimore
(Maryland), a city of 300,000 inhabitants, they have
been victorious. They have taken possession of the sta-
tion and have burned it, together with all the wagons of
petroleum which were there. At Pittsburgh (Pennsyl-
vania), a city of 100,000 inhabitants, the workers are at
the present time masters of the city, after having seized
guns and cannon. . . . The strike is extending to the
near-by railroads and is gaining in the direction of the
Pacific. Great agitation reigns in New York. It is an-
nounced that the troops will concentrate, that Sheridan
has been named commander, and that the Western States
have ofifered their help.' In the following number, a de-
tailed article, written by Kropotkin, recounted the de-

64 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

nouement of the crisis, the recovery of Pittsburgh, where
two thousand wagons loaded with merchandise had been
burned, the repression and the disarray of the strikers
following the treachery of the miserable false brothers,
and the final miscarriage of the movement. But if there
had been, in this attempt of popular insurrection, weak
sides that had brought about the failure, Kropotkin
rightly praised the qualities of which the American work-
ing people had just given proof: 'This movement will
have certainly impressed profoundly the proletariat of
Eui-ope and excited its admiration. Its spontaneity, its
simultaneousness at so many distant points communicat-
ing only by telegraph, the aid given by the workers of
different trades, the resolute character of the uprising
from the beginning, call forth all our sympathies, excite
our admiration, and awaken our hopes. . . . But the
blood of our brothers of America shall not have flowed in
vain. Their energy, their union in action, their courage
will serve as an example to the proletariat of Europe.
But would that this flowing of noble blood prove once
again the blindness of those who amuse the people with
the plaything of parliamentarism when the powder maga-
zine is ready to take fire, unknown to them, at the fall
of the least spark.' " (2)

The news of industrial troubles, such as the above,
convinced the anarchist elements of Europe that Amer-
ica was ripe for direct action and the revolution. And
it was indeed this period of profound industrial unrest
that gave a forward impulse to all radical movements in
the late seventies. Socialist newspapers sprang up in all
parts of the country, and both socialist and trade-union
organizations took on an immense development. Riots,
minor insurrections, and strikes were symptoms of an
all-pervading discontent. Simultaneously with this, many

JOHANN MOST IN AMERICA 65

revolutionists, upon being expelled from Germany, were
injected into the ferment. With many other refugees,
the Germans then began to form revolutionary clubs, and,
in 1882, Johann Most appeared in the United States
scattering broadcast the terrorist ideas of Bakounin and
Nechayeff.

Most was perhaps the most fiery personality that ap-
peared in the ranks of the anarchists after the death of
Bakounin. A cruel stepmother, a pitiless employer, a long
sickness, and an operation which left his face deformed
forever are some of the incidents of his unhappy child-
hood. He received a poor education, but read exten-
sively, and as a bookbinder worked at his trade in Ger-
many, Austria, Italy, and Switzerland. He became at-
tached to the labor movement toward the end of the six-
ties, and was elected to the German Reichstag in 1874.
Forced to leave Germany as a result of the anti-socialist
law, he went to London, where he established Die Frei-
heit, at first a social-democratic paper, which was smug-
gled into Germany. He became, however, more and
more violent, and in 1880, at a secret gathering of the
German socialists at Wyden in Switzerland, he and his
friend Hasselmann were expelled from the Germany
party. After this he no longer attempted to conceal his
anarchist sympathies, and in the Freiheit, on the plat-
form, and on every possible occasion he preached prin-
ciples almost identical with those of Nechayeff and
Bakounin. In a pamphlet on the scientific art of revolu-
tionary warfare and of dynamiters he prescribes in de-
tail where bombs should be placed in churches, palaces,
and ball-rooms.* He advises wholly individual action,
in order that the groups may suffer as little harm as pos-
sible. His pamphlet also contains a dictionary of poisons
* See Revolutionare Kriegswissenschaft.

66 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

which may be usefully employed against politicians,
traitors, and spies. "Extirpate the miserable brood !" he
writes in Die Freiheit; "extirpate the wretches! Thus
runs the refrain of a revolutionary song of the working
classes, and this will be the exclamation of the executive
of a victorious proletariat army when the battle has been
won. For at the critical moment the executioner's block
must ever be before the eyes of the revolutionist.
Either he is cutting off the heads of his enemies or his
own is being cut off. Science gives us means which
make jt possible to accomplish the wholesale destruction
of these beasts quietly and deliberately." Elsewhere he
says, "Those of the reptile brood who are not put to
the sword remain as a thorn in the flesh of the new so-
ciety ; hence it would be both foolish and criminal not to
annihilate utterly this race of parasites." (3)

It was this cheerful individual who, after being ex-
pelled from the German socialist party, made prodigious
efforts to establish revolutionary organizations all over
Europe. In London he captured the Communist Work-
ing Men's Educational Society, despite the protest of a
considerable minority, and through it he undertook to
launch other revolutionary clubs. The parliamentary so-
cialists were bitterly assailed, and a congress was held in
Paris and a later one in London for the purpose of unit-
ing the revolutionists of all countries. According to
Zenker, the headquarters of the association were at Lon-
don, and sub-committees were formed to act in Paris,
Geneva, and New York. Money was to be collected "for
the purchase of poison and weapons, as well as to find
places suitable for laying mines, and so on. To attain the
proposed end, the annihilation of all rulers, ministers qf
State, nobility, the clergy, the most prominent capital-,
ists, and other exploiters, any means are permissible, and

JOHANN MOST IN AMERICA 67

therefore great attention should be given specially to the
study of chemistry and the preparation of explosives, as
being the most important weapons. Together with the
chief committee in London there will also be established
an executive bureau, whose duty is to carry out the de-
cisions of the chief committee and to conduct corre-
spondence." (4)

After these attempts to establish an anarchist Inter-
national, Most sailed for New York. Some of his ideas
had preceded him, and when he arrived he was met and
greeted by masses of German workingmen. Miss Emma
Goldman, in "Anarchism and Other Essays," tells us of
the impression he made upon her. "Some twenty-one
years ago," she says, "I heard the first great anarchist
speaker — the inimitable John Most. It seemed to me
then, and for many years after, that the spoken word
hurled forth among the masses with such wonderful elo-
quence, such enthusiasm and fire, could never be erased
from the human mind and soul. How could any one
of all the multitudes who flocked to Most's meetings es-
cape his prophetic voice!" (5) At the time of
Most's arrival the American socialist movement was
hopelessly divided over questions of methods and
tactics. Already there had been bitter quarrels be-
tween those in the movement who had formed se-
cret drilling organizations which were preparing for a
violent revolution, and those others who sought by edu-
cation, organization, and political action to achieve their
demands. In the year 1880 a number of New York
members had left the socialist organization and formed
a revolutionary group, and in October of the following
year a convention was held to organize the various revo-
lutionary groups into a national organization. Every-
thing was favorable for Most, and ,when he arrived it

68 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

was not long, with his magnetic personality and fiery agi-
tation, until he had swept out of existence the older so-
cialist organizations. In 1883 representatives from
twenty-six cities met in Pittsburgh to form the revolu-
tionary socialist and anarchist groups into one body,
called the "International Working People's Association."
The same year a dismal socialist convention was held in
Baltimore with only sixteen delegates attending. They
attempted to stem the tide to terrorism by declaring:
"We do not share the folly of the men who consider
dynamite bombs as the best means of agitation. We
know full well that a revolution must take place in the
heads and in the industrial life of men before the work-
ing class can achieve lasting success." (6)

The tide, however, was not stayed. The advocates of
direct action continued headlong toward the bitter climax
at the H'aymarket in Chicago in 1886. Just previous to
that fatal catastrophe, a series of great strikes had oc-
curred in and about that city. At the McCormick
Reaper Works a crowd of men was being addressed by
Spies, an anarchist, when the "scabs" left the factory.
A pitched battle ensued. The police were called, and,
when they were assaulted with stones, they opened fire
on the crowd, shooting indiscriminately men, women,
and children, killing six and wounding many more.
Spies, full of rage, hurried to the office of Arieiter Zei-
tung, the anarchist paper, and composed the proclama-
tion to the workingmen of Chicago which has since be-
come famous as "the revenge circular." It called upon
the workingmen to arm themselves and to avenge the
brutal murder of their brothers. Five thousand copies
of the circular, printed in English and German, were
distributed in the streets. The next evening. May 4,
1886, a mass meeting was called at the Haymarket.

JOHANN MOST IN AMERICA 69

About two thousand working people attended the meet-
ing. The mayor of the city went in person to hear the
addresses, and later testified that he had reported to Cap-
tain Bonfield, at the nearest police station, that "nothing
had occurred nor was likely to occur to require inter-
ference." Nevertheless, after Mayor Harrison had gone,
Captain Bonfield sent one hundred and seventy-six po-
licemen to march upon the little crowd that remained.
Captain Ward, the officer in charge, commanded the
meeting to disperse, and, as Fielden, one of the speakers,
retorted that the meeting was a peaceable one, a dyna-
mite bomb was thrown from an adjoining alley that
killed several policemen and wounded many more.

In the agitation that led up to the Haymarket tragedy,
dynamite had always been glorified as the poor man's
weapon. It was the power that science had given to the
weak to protect them from injustice and tyranny. As
powder and the musket had destroyed feudalism, so
dynamite would destroy capitalism. In the issue of the
Freiheit, March 18, 1883, Most printed an article called
"Revolutionary Principles." Many of the phrases are
evidently taken from the "Catechism" of Bakounin and
Nechayeff, and the sentiments are identical. During all
this period great meetings were organized to glorify some
martyr who, by the Propaganda of the Deed, had com-
mitted some great crime. For instance, vast meetings
were organized in honor of Stellmacher and others who
had murdered officers of the Viennese police. At one of
these meetings Most declared that such acts should not
be called murder, because "murder is the killing of a
human being, and I have never heard that a policeman
was a human being." (7) When August Reinsdorf was
jexecuted for an attempt on the life of the German Em-
peror, Most's Freiheit appeared with a heavy black bor-

70 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

der. "One of our noblest and best is no more," he la-
ments. "In the prison yard at Halle under the murder-
ous sword of the criminal HohenzoUern band, on the 7th
of February, August Reinsdorf ended a life full of bat-
tle and of self-sacrificing courage, as a martyr to the
great revolution." (8) It was inevitable that such views
should lead sooner or later to a tragedy, and, while most
of the Chicago anarchists were plain workingmen, simple
and kindly, at least one fanatic in the group deserves to
rank with Nechayeff and Most as an irreconcilable enemy
of the existing order. This was Louis Lingg, whose last
words as he was taken from the court were: "I re-
peat that I am the enemy of the 'order' of to-day, and I
repeat that, with all my powers, so long as breath re-
mains in me, I shall combat it. I declare again, frankly
and openly, that I am in favor of using force. I have
told Captain Schaack, and I stand by it, 'If you can-
nonade us, we shall dynamite you.' You laugh! Per-
haps you think, 'You'll throw no more bombs'; but let
me assure you that I die happy on the gallows, so confi-
dent am I that the hundreds and thousands to whom I
have spoken will remember my words; and, when you
shall have hanged us, then, mark my words, they will do
the bomb-throwing! In this hope I say to you: I de-
spise you. I despise your order, your laws, your force-
propped authority. Hang me for it !" (9)

There are many minor incidents now quite forgotten
that played a part in this American terrorism. Benjamin
R. Tucker, of New York, himself an anarchist, but not
an advocate of terrorist tactics, had in the midst of this
period to cry out in protest against the acts of those who
called themselves anarchists. In his paper, LiSePfiK
March 27, 1886, Tucker wrote on "The Beast of Cor-
munism." (10) He began by quoting Henri Rochefoi

JOHANN MOST IN AMERICA yi

who was reported to have said : "Anarchists are merely
criminals. They are robbers. They want no govern-
ment whatever, so that, when they meet you on the street,
they can knock you down and rob you." (ii)

"This infamous and libelous charge," says Tucker, "is
a very sweeping one; I only wish that I could honestly
meet it with as sweeping a denial. And I can, if I re-
strict the word anarchist as it always has been restricted
in these columns, and as it ought to be restricted every-
where and always. Confining the word anarchist so as
to include none but those who deny all external authority
over the individual, whether that of the present State or
that of some industrial collectivity or commune which
the future may produce, I can look Henri Rochefort in
the face and say : 'You lie !' For of all these men I do
not recall even one who, in any ordinary sense of the
term, can be justly styled a robber.

"But unfortunately, in the minds of the people at large,
this word anarchist is not yet thus restricted in meaning.
This is due principally to the fact that within a few
years the word has been usurped, in the face of all logic
and consistency, by a party of communists who believe
in a tyranny worse than any that now exists, who deny
to the laborer the individual possession of his product,
and who preach to their followers the following doctrine :
'Private property is your enemy; it is the beast that is
devouring you; all wealth belongs to everybody; take it
wherever you can find it; have no scruples about the
means of taking it ; use dynamite, the dagger, or the torch
to take it ; kill innocent people to take it ; but, at all events,
take it.' This is the doctrine which they call anarchy,
and this policy they dignify with the name of 'propa-
gandism by deed.'

"Well, it has borne fruit with most horrible fecundity.

•^2 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

To be sure, it has gained a large mass of adherents, espe-
cially in the Western cities, who are well-meaning men
and women, not yet become base enough to practice the
theories which they profess to have adopted. But it has
also developed, and among its immediate and foremost
supporters, a gang of criminals whose deeds for the past
two years rival in 'pure cussedness' any to be found in
the history of crime. Were it not, therefore, that I have
first, last, and always repudiated these pseudo-anarchists
and their theories, I should hang my head in shame be-
fore Rochefort's charge at having to confess that too
many of them are not only robbers, but incendiaries and
murderers. But, knowing as I do that no real anarchist
has any part or lot in these infamies, I do not confess the
facts with shame, but reiterate them with righteous wrath
and indignation, in the interest of my cause, for the pro-
tection of its friends, and to save the lives and posses-
sions of any more weak and innocent persons from being
wantonly destroyed or stolen by cold-blooded villains
parading in the mask of reform.

"Yes, the time has come to speak. It is even well-nigh
too late. Within the past fortnight a young mother and
her baby boy have been burned to death under circum-
stances which suggest to me the possibility that, had I
made this statement sooner, their lives would have been
saved ; and, as I now write these lines, I fairly shudder at
the thought that they may not reach the public and the
interested parties before some new holocaust has added
to the number of those who have already fallen victims.
Others who know the facts, well-meaning editors of lead-
ing journals of so-called communistic anarchism, may7
from a sense of mistaken party fealty, bear longer the
fearful responsibility of silence, if they will; for one I
will not, cannot. I will take the other responsibility of

JOHANN MOST IN AMERICA 73

exposure, which responsibility I personally and entirely
assume, although the step is taken after conference upon"
its wisdom with some of the most trusted and active
anarchists in America.

"Now, then, the facts. And they are facts, though I
state them generally, without names, dates, or details.

"The main fact is this: that for nearly two years a
large number of the most active members of the Ger-
man Group of the International Working People's As-
socation in New York City, and of the Social Revolution-
ary Club, another German organization in that city, have
been persistently engaged in getting money by insuring
their property for amounts far in excess of the real
value thereof, secretly removing everything that they
could, setting fire to the premises, swearing to heavy
losses, and exacting corresponding sums from the insur-
ance companies. Explosion of kerosene lamps is usually
the device which they employ. Some seven or eight fires,
at least, of this sort were set in New York and Brooklyn
in 1884 by members of the gang, netting the beneficiaries
an aggregate profit of thousands of dollars. In 1885
nearly twenty more were set, with equally profitable re-
sults. The record for 1886 has reached six already, if
not more. The business has been carried on with the
most . astonishing audacity. One of these men hiad his
premises insured, fired them, and presented his bill of
loss to the company within twenty-four hours after get-
ting his policy, and before the agent had reported the pol-
icy to the company. The bill was paid, and a few months
later the same fellow, under another name, played the
game over again, though not quite so speedily. In one
of the fires set in 1885 a woman and two children were
burned to death. The two guilty parties in this case
were members of the Bohemian Group and are now serv-

, 74 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

ing life sentences in prison. Another of the fires was
started in a six-story tenement house, endangering the
lives of hundreds, but fortunately injuring no one but
the incendiary. In one case in 1886 the firemen have
saved two women whom they found clinging to their
bed posts in a half-suffocated condition. In another a
man, woman, and baby lost their lives. Three members
of the gang are now in jail awaiting trial for murdering
and robbing an old woman in Jersey City. Two others
are in jail under heavy bail and awaiting trial for carry-
ing concealed weapons and assaulting an officer. They
were walking arsenals, and were found under circum-
stances which lead to the suspicion that they were about
to perpetrate a robbery, if not a murder.

"The profits accruing from this 'propagandism by
deed' are not even used for the benefit of the movement
to which the criminals belong, but go to fill their own
empty pockets, and are often spent in reckless, riotous
living. The guilty parties are growing bolder and bolder,
and, anticipating detection ultimately, a dozen or so of
them have agreed to commit perjury in order to involve
the innocent as accomplices in their crimes. It is their
boast that the active anarchists shall all go to the gallows
together."

The history of terrorist tactics in America largely cen-
ters about the career of Johann Most. In August Bebel's
story of his life he speaks in high terms of the unselfish
devotion and sterling character of Most in his early days.
"If later on," says Bebel, "under the anti-socialist laws,
he went astray and became an anarchist and an advocate
of direct action, and finally, although he had been a model
of abstinence, ended in the United States as a drunkard,
it was all due to the anti-socialist laws, laws which drove

JOHANN MOST IN AMERICA 75

him and many others from the country. Had he re-
mained under the influence of the men who were able to
guide him and restrain his passionate temper, the party
would have possessed in him a most zealous, self-sacrific-
ing, and indefatigable fighter." (12) Most, then, was
one of the victims of Bismarck's savage policies, as were
also nearly all the other Germans who took part in the
sordid crimes related by Tucker. And the Haymarket —
the greatest of all American tragedies — leads directly
back to the Iron Chancellor and his ferocious inquisi-
tion.

A few minor incidents of anarchist activity may be re-
corded for the following years, but the only acts of im-
portance were the shooting of President McKinley by
Czolgosz and the shooting of Henry C. Frick by Alex-
ander Berkman. In the "Prison Memoirs of an Anar-
chist," Berkman has now told us that as a youth he be-
came a disciple of Bakounin and a fiery member of the
Nihilist group. It was after the Homestead strike that
Berkman saw a chance to propagate his gospel by a deed.
Leaving his home in New York, he went to Pittsburgh
for the purpose of killing Henry C. Frick, then head of
the Carnegie Steel Company. Berkman made his way
into Frick's office, shot at and slightly wounded him. In
explanation of this act he says: "In truth, murder and
attentat (that is, political assassination) are to me oppo-
site terms. To remove a tyrant is an act of liberation,
the giving of life and opportunity to an oppressed peo-
ple." (13) For this attempt on the life of Frick, Berk-
man was condemned to a term of imprisonment of
twenty-two years. Despite a few isolated outbreaks, it
may be said, therefore, that the seeds of anarchism have
never taken root in America, just as they have never

76 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMjENT

taken root in Germany or in England. To-day there
are no active American terrorists and only a handful of
avowed anarchists. In the Latin countries, however, the
.deeds of terrorism still played a tragic part in the his-
tory of the next few years.

CHAPTER V

A SERIES OF TRAGEDIES

While Johann Most was sowing the seeds of terror-
ism in America, his comrades were actively at work in
Europe. And, if the tactics of Most led eventually to
petty thievery, somewhat the same degeneration was
overtaking the Propaganda of the Deed in Europe. Up
to 1886 robbery had not yet been adopted as a weapon of
the Latin revolutionists. In America, in Austria, and in
Russia, the doctrine had been preached and, to a certain
extent, practiced, but I'aifaire Duval was responsible for
its introduction into France. Unlike most of the pre-
ceding demonstrations, the act of Duval was essentially
an individual one. On October 5, 1886, a large house sit-
uated at 31 rue de Monceau, Paris, and occupied by
Mme. Herbelin and her daughter, Mme. Madeleine Le-
maire, the well-known artist, was robbed and half
burned. Some days later, Clement Duval and two ac-
complices, Didier and Houchard, were arrested as the
perpetrators of this act. At first the matter was treated
by the newspapers as an ordinary robbery. The Cri du
Peuple called it a simple burglary, followed by an in-
cendiary attempt. But after some days, Duval an-
nounced himself an anarchist and declared that his act
was in harmony with his faith.

On January 11 and 12, 1887, the case came before the
court. The discussions were very heated. After M. Fer-

77

78 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

nand Labori, then a very young advocate, who had been
appointed to defend Duval, had made his plea, Duval
became anxious to defend himself. He threatened, in
leaving the prison, to blow up with dynamite the jury
and the court, and heaped upon them most abusive lan-
guage. The president ordered that he should be removed
from the court. An enormous tumult then ensued in
that part of the hall where the anarchists were massed.
"Help! Help! Comrades! Long live Anarchy!" cried
Duval. "Long live Anarchy!" answered his comrades.
Thirty guards led Duval away, and the verdict was read
in the presence of an armed force with fixed bayonets.
He was condemned to death and his two accomplices
acquitted.

Eight days afterward, on January 23, an indignation
meeting against the condemnation of Duval was organ-
ized by the anarchists, at which nearly 1,000 were pres-
ent. Tennevin, Leboucher, and Louise Michel spoke in
turn, glorifying Duval. The opposition was taken by a
Blanquist, a Normandy citizen, who censured the act of
Duval, because such acts, he said, throw discredit on the
revolutionists and so retard the hour of the Social Revo-
lution.

Duval's case was appealed to the highest court in
France, but the appeal was rejected. The President of
the Republic, however, commuted his sentence of capital
punishment to enforced labor. Then followed a long
period of discussions and violent controversies between
the anarchists and the socalists over the whole affair.
The anarchists claimed the right of theft on the grounds
that it was the beginning of capitalist expropriation and
that stolen wealth could aid in propaganda and action.
The socialists, on the other hand, protested against this
theory with extreme vigor.

A SERIES OF TRAGEDIES

79

After Duval, there is little noteworthy in the terrorist
movement for a period of four years, but with May i,
1891, there began what is known as La Periode Tragique.
Five notable figures, Decamps, Ravachol, Vaillant,
Henry, and Caserio, within a period of three years, per-
formed a series of terrorist acts that cannot be forgot-
ten. Their utter desperation and abandon, the terrible
solemnity of their lives, and the almost superhuman ef-
forts they made to bring society to its knees mark the
most tragic and heroic period in the history of anarchism.
At Levallois-Perret a demonstration was organized by
the anarchists for May i. They brought out their red
and black flags, and, when the police attempted to inter-
fere and to take away their banners, they opened fire
upon them. Several fell injured, while others returned
the fire. The fight continued for some time, until finally
reinforcements arrived and the anarchists were subdued.
Six of the police and three of the anarchists were se-
verely injured, one of the latter being Decamps, who had
received severe blows from a sword. The trial took
place in August, and, when Decamps attempted to defend
himself, the judge refused to hear him. Finally he and
his friends were condemned to prison.

The next year, 1892, the avenger of Decamps ap-
peared. It was the famous Ravachol, who for a time
kept all Paris in a state of terror. In the night of Febru-
ary 14 there was a theft of dynamite from the establish-
ment of Soisy-sous-EHoles. On March 11 an explosion
shook the house on Boulevard Saint-Germain, in which
lived M. Benoit, the judge who had presided in August,
1891, at the trial of Decamps at Levallois. On March 15
a bomb was discovered on the window of the Lobau bar-
racks. On March 27 a bomb was exploded on the first
floor of a house on rue de Clichy, occupied by M. Bulot,

8o VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

who had held the office of Public Minister at the trial in
Levallois. It was only by chance, on the accusation of
a boy by the name of Lherot, who was employed in a
restaurant, that the police eventually captured Ravachol.
He admitted having exploded the bombs in rue de Clichy
and Boulevard Saint-Germain, "in order to avenge," he
said, ""the abominable violences committed against our
friends, Decamps, Leveille, and Dardare." (i) On
April 26 a bomb was exploded in the restaurant where
Lherot, the informer, worked, killing the proprietor and
severely wounding one of the patrons.

The public was thrown into a state of dreadful alarm.
The next day, when Ravachol was brought to trial, some
awful foreboding seemed to possess those who were pres-
ent. All Paris was guarded. In spite of the efforts of
the Public Minister, the jury spared Ravachol on the
ground of extenuating circumstances. It is difficult to
say whether it was fear or pity that determined the de-
cision of the jurors. In any case, Ravachol was acquit-
ted, only to be condemned to death a few months later
for strangling the hermit of Chambles, and he was then
executed.

"What shall one think of Ravachol?" says Prolo in
Les Anarchistes. "He assassinated a mendicant, he broke
into tombs in order to steal jewels, he manufactured coun-
terfeit money, or, more exactly, substituting himself for
the State, he cast five-franc pieces in silver, with the
authentic standard, and put them in circulation. Lastly,
he dynamited some property. He is of mystical
origin. Profoundly religious in his early youth, he
embraces with the same ardor, the same passion, and
the same spirit of sacrifice the new political theory of
equality. He throws himself deliberately outside the lim-
its of the society which he abhors — Skills, robs, and

A SERIES OF TRAGEDIES 8l

avenges his brothers. And let anyone question him, he
replies : 'A begging hermit, he is a parasite and should
be suppressed. One ought not to bury jewels when chil-
dren are hungry, when mothers weep, and when men suf-
fer from misery. The State makes money. Is it of good
alloy? I make it as the State makes it and of the same
alloy! As to dynamite, it is the arm of the weak who
avenge themselves or avenge others for the humiliating
oppression of the strong and their unconscious accom-
plices.' " (2)

Although the anarchists accepted Duval and defended
his acts, Ravachol was variously appreciated by them.
Jean Grave, the French anarchist, and Merlino, the Ital-
ian anarchist, both condemned Ravachol. "He is not one
of us," declared the lattei", "and we repudiate him. His
explosions lose their revolutionary character because of
his personality, which is unworthy to serve the cause of
humanity." (3) filisee Reclus, on the contrary, wrote of
Ravachol in the Sempre Avanti as follows: "I admire
his courage, his goodness of heart, his grandeur of soul,
the generosity with which he has pardoned his enemies.
I know few men who surpass him in generosity. I pass
over the question of knowing up to what point it is al-
ways desirable to push one's own right to the extreme
and whether other considerations, actuated by a senti-
ment of human solidarity, ought not to make it yield.
But I am none the less of those who recognize in Rava-
chol a hero of a rare grandeur of soul." (4)

In the Entretiens poUtiques et litter aires, under the
title, Eloge de Ravachol, ^3m\ Adam wrote : "Whatever
may have been the invectives of the bourgeois press and
the tenacity of the magistrates in dishonoring the act of
the victim, they have not succeeded in persuading us of
his error. After so many judicial debates, chronicles,

82 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

and appeals to legal murder, Ravachol remains the
propagandist of the grand idea of the ancient religions
which extolled the quest of individual death for the good
of the world, the abnegation of self, of one's life, and of
one's fame for the exaltation of the poor and the humble.
He is definitely the Renewer of the Essential Sacri-
fice." (5) Museux, in I' Art social, said: "Ravachol has
remained what he at first showed himself, a rebel. He
has made the sacrifice of his life for an idea and to cause
that idea to pass from a dream into reality. He has re-
coiled before nothing, claiming the responsibility for his
acts. He has been logical from one end to the other.
He has given example of a fine character and indomita-
ble energy, at the same time that he has summed up in
himself the vague anger of the revolutionists." (6)

Hardly had the people of Paris gotten over their ter-
ror of the deeds of Ravachol when August Vaillant en-
deavored to blow up with dynamite the French Chamber
of Deputies. He was a socialist, almost unknown among
the anarchists. He said afterward that political-financial
scandals were arousing popular anger and that it was
necessary to thrust the sword into the heart of public
powers, since they could not be conquered peaceably. In
order to carry out his plan, he went to Palais-Bourbon,
and, when the session opened, Vaillant arose in the gal-
lery to throw his bomb. A woman, perceiving the inten-
tions of the thrower, grasped his arm, causing the bomb
to strike a chandelier, with the result that only Abbe Le-
mire and some spectators were injured. In the midst of
commotion, with men stupefied with terror, the president
of the Chamber, M. Charles Dupuy, called out the
memorable words, "The session continues."

Arraigned before the court, Vaillant was condemned
to death. He said in explanation of his act, "I carried

A SERIES OF TRAGEDIES 83

this bomb to those who are primarily responsible for so-
cial misery." (7) "Gentlemen, in a few minutes you are
to deal your blow, but in receiving your verdict I shall
have at least the satisfaction of having wounded the ex-
isting society, that cursed society in which one may see a
single man spending, uselessly, enough to feed thousands
of families; an infamous society which permits a few
individuals to monopolize all the social wealth, while
there are hundreds of thousands of unfortunates who
have not even the bread that is not refused to dogs, and
while entire families are committing suicide for want of
the necessities of life. . . . (8)

"I conclude, gentlemen, by saying that a society in
which one sees such social inequalities as we see all about
us, in which we see every day suicides caused by poverty,
prostitution flaring at every street corner — a society
whose principal monuments are barracks and prisons —
such a society must be transformed as soon as possible,
on pain of being eliminated, and that speedily, from the
human race. Hail to him who labors, by no matter what
means, for this transformation ! It is this idea that has
guided me in my duel with authority, but as in this duel
I have only wounded my adversary, it is now its turn to
strike me." (9)

The Abbe Lemire, Deputy from the North, the only
member of the Chamber who had been slightly wounded
by the explosion of the bomb, urged the pardon of the
condemned man. The socialist Deputies likewise de-
cided to appeal to the pardoning power of the President
of the Republic and signed the following petition : "The
undersigned, members of the Chamber of Deputies which
was made the object of the criminal attempt of December
9, have the honor to address to the President of the Re-

84 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

public a last appeal in favor of the condemned." (lo)
It has long been the custom in France not to punish an
abortive crime with the death penalty, and it was gen-
erally believed that Vaillant's sentence would be changed
to life imprisonment. President Carnot, however, re-
fused to extend any mercy, and Vaillant was guillotined.
A few days after the execution of Vaillant, a bomb
was thrown among some guests who were quietly assem-
bled, listening to the music, in the cafe of the Hotel Ter-
minus. Several persons were severely wounded. After
a fierce struggle with the police, fimile Henry was ar-
rested. In the trial it was learned that he had been re-
sponsible for a number of other explosions that had taken
place in the two or three years previous. He had at-
tempted to avenge the miners who had been on strike at
Carmaux by blowing up the manager of the company.
He had deposited the bomb in the office of the company,
where it was discovered by the porter. It was brought
to the police, where it exploded, killing the secretary and
three of his agents. Henry was a silent, lonely man,
wholly unknown to the police. Mystical, sentimental,
and brooding, he believed that the rich were individually
responsible for misery and social wrong. "I had been
told that life was easy and with abundant opportunity
for all intellects and all energies," he declared at his trial,
"but experience has shown me that only the cynics and
the servile can make a place for themselves at the ban-
quet. I had been told that social institutions were based
on justice and equality, and I have seen about me only
lies and deceit. Each day robbed me of an illusion.
Everywhere I went I was witness of the same sorrows
about us, of the same joys about others. Therefore I
was not long in understanding that the words which I
had been taught to reverence — honor, devotion, duty —

A SERIES OF TRAGEDIES 85

were nothing but a veil concealing the most shameful
baseness. . . .

"For an instant I was attracted by socialism; but I
was not long in withdrawing myself from that party. I
had too much love for liberty, too much respect for indi-
vidual initiative, too much dislike for incorporation to
take a number in the registered army of the Fourth Es-
tate. I brought into the struggle a profound hatred,
every day revived by the repugnant spectacle of this so-
ciety in which everything is sordid, ... in which
everything hinders the expansion of human passions, the
generous impulses of the heart, the free flight of thought.
I have, however, wished, as far as I was able, to strike
forcibly and justly. ... In this pitiless war which
we have declared on the bourgeoisie we ask no pity. We
give death and know how to suffer it. That is why I
await your verdict with indifference." (11)

In the case of Henry appeals were also made to Presi-
dent Carnot for mercy, but they, too, were ignored, and
Henry was guillotined a few days after Vaillant. A
month or so later, June 25, President Carnot arrived at
Lyons to open an exposition. That evening, while on his
way to a theater, he was stabbed to death by the Italian
anarchist, Caserio, on the handle of whose stiletto was
engraved "Vaillant."

This was the climax to the series of awful tragedies.
It would be impossible to picture the utter consternation
of the entire French nation. The characters that had
figured in this terrible drama were not ordinary men.
Their addresses before condemnation were so eloquent
and impressive as to awaken lively emotions among the
most thoughtful and brilliant men in France. They chal-
lenged society. The judge refused Decamps a hearing,
and Ravachol undertook individually to destroy the

86 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

judge. Vaillant, deciding that the lawmakers were re-
sponsible for social injustice, undertook with one bomb
to destroy them. Henry, feeling that it was not the law-
makers who were responsible, but the rich, careless, and
sensual, who in their mastery over labor caused poverty,
misery, and all suffering, sought with his bomb to de-
stroy them. Utterly blind to the sentiments which moved
these men, the President of the Republic allowed them
to be guillotined, and Caserio, stirred to his very depths
by what he considered to be the sublime acts of his com-
rades, stabbed to death the President.

It is hard to pass judgment on lives such as these. One
stands bewildered and aghast before men capable of such
deeds ; and, if they defy frivolous judgment, even to ex-
plain them seems beyond the power of one who, in the
presence of the same wrongs that so deeply moved them,
can still remain inert. Yet is there any escape to the
conclusion that all this was utter waste of life and de-
votion? Far from awakening in their opponents the
slightest thought of social wrong, these men, at the ex-
pense of their lives, awakened only a spirit of revenge.
"An eye for an eye" was now the sentiment of the mili-
tants on both sides. All reason and sympathy disap-
peared, and, instead, every brutal passion had play. Po-
litically and socially, the reactionaries were put in the
saddle. Every progressive in France was placed on the
defensive. Anyone who hinted of social wrong was os-
tracized. Csesarism ruled France, and, through les lois
scelerates, every bush was beaten, every hiding-place un-
covered, until every anarchist was driven out. The acts
of Vaillant and Henry, like the acts of the Chicago anar-
chists, not only failed utterly as propaganda, they even
closed the ear and the heart of the world to everything

A SERIES OF TRAGEDIES 87

and anything that was associated, or that could in any
manner be connected, with anarchism. They served only
one purpose — every malign influence and reactionary ele-
ment took the acts of these misguided prodigies as a pre-
text to fasten upon the people still more firmly both so-
cial and political injustice. To no one were they so use-
ful as to their enemy.

For three years after this tragic period little note-
worthy occurred in the history of terrorism. In Barce-
lona, Spain, a bomb was thrown, and immediately three
hundred men and women were arrested. They were all
thrown into prison and subjected to torture. Some were
killed, others driven insane, although after a time some
were released upon appeals made by the press and by
many notables of other countries of Europe. The Prime
Minister of Spain, Canovas del Castillo, was chiefly re-
sponsible for the torture of the victims. And in 1897 a
young Italian, Angiolillo, went to Spain, and, at an inter-
view which he sought with the Prime Minister, shot him.
The same year an attempt was made on the life of the
king of Greece, and in 1898 the Empress of Austria was
assassinated in Switzerland by an Italian named Luc-
cheni. The latter had gone there intending to kill the
Duke of York, but, not finding him, decided to destroy
the Empress. In 1900 King Humbert of Italy was as-
sassinated by Gaetano Bresci. The latter had been work-
ing as a weaver in America, where he had also edited
an anarchist paper. He was deeply moved when the
story reached him of some soldiers who had shot and
killed some peasants, who through hunger had been
driven to riot. He demanded money of his comrades in
Patersoil, New Jersey, and, when he obtained it, hurried
back to his native land, where, at Monzo, on the 29th of
July he shot the King. The next year on September 5,

88 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

President McKinley was shot in Buffalo by Leon Czol-
gosz.

No other striking figure appears among the anarchists
until 1912. In the early months of that year all Paris
was terrified by a series of crimes unexampled, it is said,
in Western history. The deeds of Bonnot and his con-
federates were so reckless, daring, and openly defiant,
their escapes so miraculous, and the audacity of their as-
saults so incredible, that the people of Paris were put in a
state bordering on frenzy. Just before the previous
Christmas, in broad daylight, on a busy street, the band
fell upon a bank messenger. They shot him and took
from his wallet $25,000. They then jumped in an auto-
mobile and disappeared. A short time later a police
agent called upon a chauffeur who was driving at excess
speed to stop. It was in the very center of Paris, but
instead of slackening his pace one of the occupants of
the car drew a revolver, and, firing, killed the officer. A
pursuit was organized, but the murderers escaped.

Several other crimes were committed by the band in
the next few days, but perhaps the most daring was that
of March 25. In the forest of Senart, at eight o'clock
in the morning, a band of five men stopped a chauffeur
driving a powerful new motor car. They shot the chauf-
feur and injured his companion. The five men then took
the car, and proceeded at great speed to the famous rac-
ing center of Chantilly. They went directly to a bank,
descended from the car, and shot down the three men in
charge of the bank. They then seized from the safe
$10,000. A crowd which had gathered was kept back
by one of the bandits with a rifle. The others came out,
opened fire on the spectators, started the car at its utmost
speed, and disappeared.

Not long after, Monsieur Jouin, deputy chief of the

A SERIES OF TRAGEDIES 89

Surete, and Chief Inspector Colmar were making a
domiciliary search in a house near Paris. Instead of
finding what they thought, a man crouching beneath a
bed sprang upon them, and in the fight Jouin was killed
and Colmar severely injured. Bonnot, although injured,
escaped by almost miraculous means.

At last, on April 29, the band, which had defied the
police force of Paris for four months, was discovered
concealed in a garage said to belong to a wealthy anar-
chist. A body of police besieged the place, and aftef two
police officers were killed a dynamite cartridge was ex-
ploded that destroyed the garage. Bonnot was then cap-
tured, fighting to the last. The police reported the find-
ing of Bonnot's will, in which he says : "I am a cele-
brated man. . . . Ought I to regret what I have
done? Yes, perhaps; but I must live my life. So much
the worse for idiotic and imbecile society. ... I am
not more guilty," he continues, "than the sweaters who
exploit poor devils." (12) His final thought, it is said,
was for his accomplices, both of whom were women, one
his mistress, the other the manager of the Journal An-
archie.

CHAPTER VI

SEEKING THE CAUSES

Such is the tragic story of barely forty years of ter-
rorism in Western Europe. It reads far more like lurid
fiction than the cold facts of history. Yet these amazing
irreconcilables actually lived — in our time — and fought,
at the cost of their lives, the entire organization of so-
ciety. Surely few other periods in history can show a
series of characters so daring, so bitter, so bent on de-
struction and annihU^tion. Bakounin, Nechayeff, Most,
Lingg, Duval, Decamps, Ravachol, Henry, Vaillant, Ca-
serio, and Luccheni — these bewildering rebels — indi-
vidually waged their deadly conflict with the world.
With the weakness of their one single life in revolt
against society — ^protected as it is by countless thousands
of police, millions of armed men, and all its machinery
for defense — these amazing creatures fought their fight
and wrote their page of protest in the world's history.
Think of it as we will, this we know, that the world can-
not utterly ignore men who lay down their lives for any
cause. Men may write and agitate, they may scream
never so shrilly about the wrongs of the world, but when
they go forth to fight single-handed and to die for what
they preach they have at least earned the right to de-
mand of society an inquiry.

What was it that drove these men to violence? Was
it the teachings of Bakounin, of Nechayeflf, and of Most?
Their writings have been read and pondered over by

90

SEEKING THE CAUSES 91

thousands of yearning and impressionable minds. They
have been drink to the thirsty and food to the hungry.
Yet one anarchist at least denies that the writings of
these terrorists have moved men to violence. "My con-
tention is," says Emma Goldman, "that they were im-
pelled, not by the teachings of anarchism, but by the
tremendous pressure of conditions, making life unbear-
able to their sensitive natures." (i) Returning again to
the same thought, she exclaims, "How utterly fallacious
the stereotyped notion that the teachings of anarchism,
or certain exponents of these teachings, are responsible
for the acts of political violence." (2) To this indefa-
tigable propagandist of anarchist doctrine, those who have
been led into homicidal violence are "high strung, like a
violin string." "They weep and moan for life, so relent-
less, so cruel, so terribly inhuman. In a desperate mo-
ment the string breaks." (3)

Yet, if it be true that doctrines have naught to do with
the spread of terrorism, why is it that among many mil-
lion socialists there are almost no terrorists, while among
a few thousand anarchists there are many terrorists?
The pressure of adverse social conditions is felt as keenly
by the socialists as by the anarchists. The one quite as
much as the other is a rebel against social ills. The in-
dictment made by the socialists against political and eco-
nomic injustice is as far-reaching as that of the anar-
chists. Why then does not the socialist movement pro-
duce terrorists ? Is it not that the teachings of Marx and
of all his disciples dwell upon the folly of violence, the
futility of riots, the madness of assassination, while, on
the other hand, the teachings of Bakounin, of Nechayeff,
of Kropotkin, and of Most advocate destructive violence
as a creative force? "Extirpate the wretches 1" cries
Most. "Make robbers our allies!" says Nechayeff.

92 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

"Propagate the gospel by a deed !" urges Kropotkin, and
throughout Bakounin's writings there appears again and
again the plea for "terrible, total, inexorable, and uni-
versal destruction." Both socialists and anarchists preach
their gospel to the weary and heavy-laden, to the de-
spondent and the outraged, who may readily be led to
commit acts of despair. They have, after all, little to
lose, and their life, at present unbearable, can be made
little worse by punishment. Yet millions of the miser-
able have come into the socialist movement to hear the
fiercest of indictments against capitalism, and it is but
rare that one becomes a terrorist. What else than the
teachings of anarchism and of socialism can explain this
difference ?

Unquestionably, socialism and anarchism attract dis-
tinctly different types, who are in many ways alien to
each other. Their mental processes differ. Their nerv-
ous systems jar upon each other. Even physically they
have been known to repel each other. Born of much the
same conditions, they fought each other in the cradle.
From the very beginning they have been irreconcilable,
and with perfect frankness they have shown their con-
tempt for each other. About the kindest criticism that
the socialist makes of the anarchist is that he is a child,
while the anarchist is convinced that the socialist is a
Philistine and an inbred conservative who, should he
ever get power, would immediately hang the anarchists.*
They are traditional enemies, who seem utterly inca-
pable of understanding each other. Intellectually, they
fail to grasp the meaning of each other's philosophy. It
is but rare that a socialist, no matter how conscientious a
student, will confess he fully understands anarchism. On

* Kropotkin, in "The Conquest of Bread," p. 73, suggests that
in the Revolution the socialists will probably hang the anarchists.

SEEKING THE CAUSES 93

the other hand, no one understands the doctrines of
socialism so little as the anarchist. It is possible, there-
fore, that the same conditions which, drive the anarchist
to terrorist acts lead the socialist to altogether different
methods, but the reasonable and obvious conclusion
would be that teachings and doctrines determine the
methods that each employ.

The anarchist is, as Emma Goldman says, "high
strung." His ear is tuned to hear unintermittently the
agonized cry. To follow the imagery of Shelley, he
seems to be living in a "mind's hell," (4) wherein hate,
scorn, pity, remorse, and despair seem to be tearing out
the nerves by their bleeding roots. Bjornstjerne Bjorn-
son, Frangois Coppee, fimile Zola, and many other great
writers have sought to depict the psychology of the anar-
chist, but I think no one has approached the poet Shel-
ley, who had in himself the heart of the anarchist. He
was a son-in-law and a disciple of William Godwin, one
of the fathers of anarchism. "Prometheus Unbound,"
"The Revolt of Islam," and "The Mask of Anarchy,"
are expressions of the very soul of Godwin's philosophy.
Shelley was "cradled into poetry by wrong," as a multi-
tude of- other unhappy men are cradled into terrorism by
wrong. He was "as a nerve o'er which do creep the else
unfelt oppressions of this earth," and he "could moan for
woes which others hear not." He, too, "could . . .
with the poor and trampled sit and weep." (5) There
is in nearly all anarchists this supersensitiveness, this
hyperesthesia that leads to ecstasy, to hysteria, and to
fanaticism. It is a neuropathy that has led certain scien-
tists, like Lorabroso and Krafft-Ebbing, to suggest that
some anarchist crimes can only be looked upon as a
means to indirect suicide. They are outbursts that lead
to a spectacular martyr-like ending to brains that "too

94 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

much thought expands," to hearts overladen, and to
nerves all unstrung. Life is a burden to them, though
they lack the courage to commit suicide directly. Such
is the view of these students of criminal pathology, and
they cite a long list of political criminals who can only
be explained as those who have sought indirectly self-
destruction. It is a type of insanity that leads to acts
which seem sublime to others in a state of like torture
both of mind and of nerves.

This explains no doubt the acts of some terrorists, and
at the same time it condemns the present attitude of so-
ciety toward the terrorist. Think of hanging the tor-
mented soul who could say as he was taken to the gal-
■ lows : "I went away from my native place because I
was frequently moved to tears at seeing little girls of
eight or ten years obliged to work fifteen hours a day for
the paltry pay of twenty centimes. Young women of
eighteen or twenty also work fifteen hours daily for a
mockery of remuneration. . . .

"I have observed that there are a great many people
who are hungry, and many children who suffer, while
bread and clothes abound in the towns. I saw many and
large shops full of clothing and woolen stuffs, and I
also saw warehouses full of wheat and Indian corn, suit-
able for those who are in want." (6) When such a tor-
tured spirit is driven to homicide, how is it possible for
society to demand and take that life? Shall we admit
that there is a duel between society and these souls de-
ranged by the wrongs of society? "In this duel," said
Vaillant, "I have only wounded my adversary, it is now
his turn to strike me." (7) It is tragic enough that a
poor and desperate soul, like Vaillant, should have felt
himself in deadly combat with society, but how much
more tragic it is for society to admit that fact, accept the

SEEKING THE CAUSES 95

challenge, and take that life ! "If you cannonade us, we
shall dynamite you," said Louis Lingg. (8) And we an-
swer, "If you dynamite us, we shall cannonade you."
And in so far as this is our sole attitude toward these
rebels, wherein are we superior? For Lingg to say that
was at least heroic. For us so to answer is not even
heroic. Our paid men see to it. It is done as a matter
of course and forgotten.

These men say that justice exists only for the power-
ful, that the poor are robbed, and that "the lamp of their
soul" is put out. They beg us to listen, and we will not.
They ask us to read, and we will not. "It takes a loud
voice to make the deaf hear," said Vaillant. They then
give all they have to execute one dreadful deed of
propaganda in order to awaken us. Must even this fail ?
We can hang them, but can we forget them? After
every deed of the anarchists the press, the police, and the
pulpit carry on for weeks a frenzied discussion over
their atrocities. The lives of these Propagandists of the
Deed are then crushed out, and in a few months even
their names are forgotten. There seems to be an innate
dread among us to seek the causes that lie at the bottom
of these distressing symptoms of our present social
regime. We prefer, it seems, to become like that we con-
template. We seek to terrorize them, as they seek to
terrorize us. As the anarchist believes that oppression
may be ended by the murder of the oppressor, so society
cherishes the thought that anarchism may be ended by
the murder of the anarchist. Are not our methods in
truth the same, and can any man doubt that both are
equally futile and senseless? Both the anarchy of the
powerful and the anarchy of the weak are stupid and
abortive, in that they lead to results diametrically op-

koLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

I the ends sought. Tennyson was never nearer
-n-gresTsocial truth than when he wrote :

"He that roars for liberty-
Faster binds a tyrant's power;
And the tyrant's cruel glee
Forces on the freer hour." (9)

No one perhaps is better qualified than Lombroso to
speak on the present punitive methods 'of society as a
direct cause of terrorism. "Punishment," he says, "far
from being a palliative to the fanaticism and the nervous
diseases of others, exalts them, on the contrary, by ex-
citing their altrustic aberration and their thirst for mar-
tyrdom. In order to heal these anarchist wounds there
is, according to some statesmen, nothing but hanging on
the gallows and prison. For my part, I consider it just
indeed to take energetic measures against the an-
archists. However, it is not necessary to go so far as
to take measures which are merely the result of mo-
mentary reactions, measures which thus become as im-
pulsive as the causes which have produced them and in
their turn a source of new violence.

"For example, I am not an unconditional adversary of
capital punishment, at least when it is a question of the
criminal born, whose existence is a constant danger to
worthy people. Consequently, I should not have hesi-
tated to condemn Pini * and Ravachol. On the other
hand, I believe that capital punishment or severe or
merely ignominious penalties are not suited to the crimes
and the offenses of the anarchists in general. First,

* Pini declared that he had committed robberies amounting to
over three hundred thousand francs from the bourgeoisie in
order to avenge the oppressed. Cf. Lombroso, "Les Anar-
chistes," p. 52.

SEEKING THE CAUSES 97

many of them are mentally deranged, and for these it is
the asylum, and not death or the gallows, that is fitting.
It is necessary also to take account, in the case of some
of these criminals, of their noble altruism which renders
them worthy of certain regard. Many of these people
are souls that have gone astray and are hysterical, like
Vaillant and Henry, who, had they been engaged in some
other cause, far from being a danger, would have been
able to be of use. in this society which they wished to
destroy. . . .

"As to indirect suicides, is it not to encourage them
and to make them attain the end that they desire when
we inflict on all those so disposed a spectacular death?
. . . For many criminals by passion, unbalanced by
an inadequate education, and whose feeling is aroused by
either their own misery or at the sight of the misery of
others, we would no more award the death penalty if the
motive has been exclusively political, because they are
much less dangerous than the criminal born. On the
other hand, commitment to the asylum of the epileptic
and the hysteric would be a practical measure, especially
in France, where ridicule kills them. Martyrs are ven-
erated and fools are derided." (10)

Of course, Lombroso is endeavoring to prescribe a
method of treatment for the terrorist that will not breed
more terrorists. He sees in the present punitive methods
an active cause of violence. However, it is perhaps im-
possible to hope that society will adopt any different atti-
tude than that which it has taken in the past toward these
unbalanced souls. In fact, it seems that a savage lex
talionis is wholly satisfying to the feudists on both sides.
Neither the one nor the other seeks to understand the
forces driving them both. They are bent on destroying
each other, and they will probably continue in that

98 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

struggle for a long time to come. However, if we learn
little from those actually engaged in the conflict, there
are those outside who have labored earnestly to under-
stand and explain the causes of terrorism. Ethics, re-
ligion, psychology, criminal pathology, sociology, eco-
nomics, jurisprudence — all contribute to the explanation.
And, while it is not possible to go into the entire matter
as exhaustively as one could wish, there are several
points which seem to make clear the cause of this almost
individual struggle between the anarchists above and the
anarchists below.

Some of those who have written of the causes of ter-
rorism have a partisan bias. There are those among the
Catholic clergy, for instance, who have sought to place
the entire onus on the doctrines of modern socialism.
This has, in turn, led August Bebel to point out that the
teachings of certain famous men in the Church have
condoned assassination. He reminds us of Mariana, the
Jesuit, who taught under what circumstances each indi-
vidual has a right to take the life of a tyrant. His work,
De Rege et Rege Constitutione, was famous in its time.
Lombroso tells us that "the Jesuits . . . who even
to-day sustain the divine right of kings, when the kings
themselves believe in it no longer, revolted at one time
against the princes who were not willing to follow them
in their misoneique and retirograde fanaticism and hurled
themselves into regicide. Thus three Jesuits were exe-
cuted in England in 1551 for complicity in a conspiracy
against the life of Elizabeth, and two others in 1605 in
connection with the powder plot. In France, Pere Guig-
nard was beheaded for high treason against Henry IV.
(1595). Some Jesuits were beheaded in Holland for the
conspiracies against Maurice de Nassau (1598); and,
later in Portugal, after the attempt to assassinate King

SEEKING THE CAUSES 99

Joseph (1757), three of the Jesuits were implicated; and
in Spain (1766) still others were condemned for their
conspiracy against Ferdinand IV.

"During the same period two Jesuits were hanged in
Paris as accomplices in the attempt against Louis XV.
When they did not take an active part in political
crimes, they exercised indirectly their influence by means
of a whole series of works approving regicide or tyranni-
cide, as they were pleased to distinguish it in their books.
Mariana, in his book, De Rege et Rege Constitutione,
praises Clement and apologizes for regicide ; and that, in
spite of the fact that the Council of Constance had con-
demned the maxim according to which it was permitted
to kill a tyrant"* (11)

That the views of Mariana were very similar to those
of the terrorists will be seen by the following quotation
from his famous book: "It is a question," he writes, in
discussing the best means of killing a king, "whether it is
more expedient to use poison or the dagger. The use of
poison in the food has a great advantage in that it pro-
duces its effect without exposing the life of the one who
has recourse to this method. But such a death would be
a suicide, and one is not permitted to become an accom-
plice to a suicide. Happily, there is another method
available, that of poisoning the clothing, the chairs, the

*"The work of Mariana was afterward approved by Sola
(Tractus de legibus), by Gretzer (Opera omnia), by Be-
cano (^Opuscula theologica Summa Theologicte scholastics).

"Pere Emanuel {Aphorismi confessariorum) , Gregoire de
Valence {Comment. Theolog.), Keller (Tyrannicidium) , and
Suarez (Defentio fidei cathol.) hold similar ideas, while Azor
(Institut. moral.), Lorin {Comm. in librum psalmorum), Co-
mitolo (Responsa morala), etc., recognized the right of every
individual to kill the prince for his own defense."— L« Anar-
chistes, p. 207.

100 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

bed. This is the method that it is necessary to put into
execution in imitation of the Mauritanian kings, who,
under the pretext of honoring their rivals with gifts,
sent them clothes that had been sprinkled with an in-
visible substance, with which contact alone has a fatal
effect." (12)

It has also been pointed out that, although Catholics
have rareljrhEeirgi^fQyfevoluttotiaSr poEtical an a~en3=
iiomic'ffieorres'"tJie Mafiaand tjje, ..Camorra in Italv . the
Fenians in Ireland, and the Molly Maguires in A merica
were all organizations of Catholi cs which pursued th e
same terrorist tactics that we find i n the ana rchist move-
ment. These are~un^esfiona51e facts7yet they~explSn
nothing. ' Certainly Zenker is 'j Wified in saym^T^I The
d eeds o f people like Jacques Clement, RavaillaCjjCorda^,
Sand, anHXasertorarerall'of the ■same kifiaTHardly. any-
one will be found to-day to maintain tha t Sand's _a ction
followed"" from 'tKF"views _^of_ the Burschenschaft, or
Clement's froni Catholicism, even wHen "we" learn that
San3' was regard'eS" by his 'f eHows" "a?" a saint, as was
Charlotte Corday and Clement, or even when learned
Jesuits like Sa, Mariana, and others, cum licentia et
approbatione superiorum, in connection with Clement's
outrage, discussed the question of regicide in a manner
not unworthy of Nechayeff or Most." (13) It therefore
ill becomes the Catholic clergy to attack socialism on the
ground of regicide, as not one socialist book or one so-
cialist leader has ever yet been known to advocate even
tyrannicide. On the other hand, while terrorism has
been extraordinarily prevalent in Catholic countries, such
as France, Italy, and Spain, no socialist will seriously
seek to lay the blame on the Catholic Church. The truth
is that the forces which produce terrorism affect the
Catholic mind as they affect the Protestant mind. In

SEEKING THE CAUSES lOI

every struggle for liberty and justice against religious,
political, or industrial oppression, some men are moved
to take desperate measures regardless of whether they
are Catholics, Protestants, or pagans.

Still other seekers after the causes of terrorism have
pointed out that the ethics of our time appear to justify
the terrorist and his tactics. History glorifies the deeds
of numberless heroes who have destroyed tyrants. The
story of William Tell is in every primer, and every
schoolboy is thrilled with the tale of the hero who shot
from ambush Gessler, the tyrant.* From the Old Testa-
ment down to even recent history, we find story after
story which make immortal patriots of men who have
committed assassination in the belief that they were serv-
ing their country. And can anyone doubt that Booth
when he shot President Lincoln f or that Czolgosz when
he murdered President McKinley was actuated by any
other motive than the belief that he was serving a cause ?
It was the idea of removing an industrial tyrant that
actuated young Alexander Berkman when he shot Henry
C. Frick, of the Carnegie Company. These latter acts
are not recorded in history as heroic, simply and solely

* Bakounin, when endeavoring to save NechayefF from being
arrested by the Swiss authorities and sent back to Russia, de-
fends him on precisely these grounds, claiming that Nechayeff
had taken the fable of William Tell seriously. Cf. (Ewures,
Vol. II, p. 29.

t Booth wrote, a day or so after killing Lincoln : "After
being hunted like a dog through swamps and woods, and last
night being chased by gunboats till I was forced to return, wet,
cold, and starving, with every man's hand against me, I am
here in despair. And why? For doing what Brutus was hon-
ored for — what made William Tell a hero; and yet I, for strik-
ing down an even greater tyrant than they ever knew, am looked
upon as a common cutthroat." Cf. "The Death of Lincoln,"
Laughlin, p. I3S-

102 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

because the popular view was not in sympathy with those
acts. Yet had they been committed at another time, un-
der different conditions, the story of these men might
have been told for centuries to admiring groups of chil-
dren.

In Carlyle's "Hero Worship" and in his philosophy of
history, the progress of the world is summarized under
the stories of great men. Certain individuals are re-
sponsible for social wrongs, while other individuals are
responsible for the great revolutions that have righted
those wrongs. In the building up, as well as in the de-
struction of empires, the individual plays stupendous
roles. This egocentric interpretation of history has not
only been the dominant one in explaining the great po-
litical changes of the past, it is now the reasoning of the
common mind, of the yellow press, of the demagogue, in
dealing with the causes of the evils of the present day.
The Republican Party declared that President McKin-
ley was responsible for prosperity ; by equally sound rea-
soning Czolgosz may have argued that he was responsi-
ble for social misery. According to this theory, Rocke-
feller is the giant mind that invented the trusts ; political
bosses such as Croker and Murphy are the infamous
creatures who fasten upon a helpless populace of mil-
lions of souls a Tammany Hall; Bismarck created mod-
ern Germany; Lloyd George created social reform in
England; while Tom Mann in England and Samuel
Gompers in America are responsible for strikes; and
Keir Hardie and Eugene Debs responsible for socialism.
The individual who with great force of ability becomes
the foremost figure in social, political, or industrial de-
velopment is immediately assailed or glorified. He be-
comes the personification of an evil thing that must be
destroyed or of a good thing that must be protected. It

SEEKING THE CAUSES 103

is a result of such reasoning that men ignorant of under-
lying social, political, or industrial forces seek to obstruct
the processes of evolution by removing the individual.
On this ground the anarchists have been led to remove
hundreds of police officials, capitalists, royalties, and
others. They have been poisoned, shot, and dynamited,
in the belief that their removal would benefit humanity.
Yet nothing would seem to be quite so obvious as the fact
that their removal has hardly caused a ripple in the
swiftly moving current of evolution. Others, often more
forceful and capable, have immediately stepped into their
places, and the course of events has remained unchanged.
Speaking on this subject, August Bebel refers to the
hero-worship of Bismarck in Germany: "There is no
other person whom the social democracy had so much
reason to hate as him, and the social democracy was not
more hated by anybody than by just that Bismarck. Our
love and our hatred were, as you see, mutual. But one
would search in vain the entire social democratic press
and literature for an expression of the thought that it
would be a lucky thing if that man were removed.
. . . But how often did the capitalist press express
the idea that, were it not for Bismarck, we would not, to
this day, have a united Germany? There cannot be a
more mistaken idea than this. The unity of Germany
would have come without Bismarck. The idea of unity
and liberty was in the sixties so powerful among all the
German people that it would have been realized, with or
without the assistance of the HohenzoUerns. The unity
of Germany was not only a political but an economic
necessity, primarily in the interests of the capitalist class
and its development. The idea of unity would have ulti-
mately broken through with elementary force. At this
juncture Bismarck made use of the tendency, in his own

I04 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

fashion, in the interest of the Hohenzollern dynasty, and
at the same time in the interest of the capitalist class and
of the Junkers, the landed nobihty. The oflEspring of this
compromise is the Constitution of the German Empire,
the provisions of which strive to reconcile the interests
of these three factors. Finally, even a man like Bis-
marck had to leave his post. 'What a misfortune for
Germany!' cried the press devoted to him. Well, what
has happened to Germany since then? Even Bismarck
himself could not have ruled it much differently than it
has been ruled since his days." ( 14)

This egoistic conception of history is carried to its
most violent extreme by the anarchists. The principles
of Nechayeff are a series of prescriptions by which fear-
less and reckless individuals may destroy other indi-
viduals. Ravachol, Vaillant, and Henry seemed ob-
sessed with the idea that upon their individual acts rested
the burden of deliverance. Bonnot's last words were,
"I am a celebrated man." From the gallows in Chicago
Fischer declared, "This is the happiest moment of my
life." (15) "Call your hangman!" exclaimed August
Spies. "Truth crucified in Socrates, in Christ, in Gior-
dano Bruno, in Huss, in Galileo, still lives — they and
others whose name is legion have preceded us on this
path. We are ready to follow!" (16) Fieldensaid: "I
have loved my fellowmen as I have loved myself. I
have hated trickery, dishonesty, and injustice. The nine-
teenth century commits the crime of killing its best
friend." (17) It is singularly impressive, in reading the
literature of anarchism, to weigh the last words of men
who felt upon their souls the individual responsibility of
saving humanity. They have uttered memorable words
because of their inherent sincerity, their devout belief in

SEEKING THE CAUSES 105

the individual, in his power for evil, and in his power to
remove that evil.

In many anarchists, however, this deification of the in-
dividual induces a morbid and diseased egotism which
drives them to the most amazing excesses ; among others,
the yearning to commit some memorable act of revolt in
order to be remembered. In fact, the ego in its worst,
as well as in its best aspect, dominates the thought and
the literature of anarchism. Max Stirner, considered
by some the founder of philosophical anarchism, calls his
book "The Ego and His Own." "Whether what I think
and do is Christian," he writes, "what do I care?
Whether it is human, liberal, humane, whether unhuman,
illiberal, inhuman, what do I ask about that? If only it
accomplishes what I want, if only I satisfy myself in it,
then overlay it with predicates as you will; it is all alike
to me." (18) "Consequently my relation to the world
is this : I no longer' do anything for it 'for God's sake,'
I do nothing 'for man's sake,' but what I do I do 'for my
sake.' " (19) "Where the world comes in my way — and
it comes in my way everywhere — I consume it to quiet
the hunger of my egoism. For me you are nothing but
— ^my food, even as I, too, am fed upon and turned to
use by you." (20)

Here society is conceived of as merely a collection of
egos. The world is a history of gods and of devils. All
the evils of the time are embodied in individual tyrants.
Some of these individuals control the social forces, others
the political, still others the industrial forces. As indi-
viduals, they overpower and enslave their individual ene-
mies. Remove a man and you destroy the source of
tyranny. A judge commits a man to death, and the
judge is dynamited. A Prime Minister sends the army
to shoot down striking workmen and the Prime Minister

I06 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

is shot. A law is passed violating the rights of free
speech, and, following that, an Emperor is shot. The
rich exploit the poor, and a fanatic throws a bomb in the
first cafe he passes to revenge the poor. Wicked and
unjust laws are made, and Vaillant goes in person to the
Chamber of Deputies to throw his bomb. The police of
Chicago murder some hungry strikers, and an avenger
goes to the Haymarket to murder the police. In all
these acts we find a point of view in harmony with the
dominant one of our day. It is the one taught in our
schools, in our pulpits, on our political platforms, and
in our press. It is the view, carried to an extreme, of
that man or group of men who believes that the ideas of
individuals determine social evolution. Nothing could
be more logical to the revolutionist who holds this view
than to seek to remove those individuals who are re-
sponsible for the existing order of society. As a rule,
the socialist stands almost alone in combating this ideo-
logical interpretation of history and of social evolution.
There is something in the nature of poetic irony in
the fact that the anarchist should take the very ethics of
capitalism and reduce them to an absurdity. It is some-
thing in the nature of a satire, sordid and terrible, which
the realism of things has here written. The very
most cherished ethical ideals of our society are used by
the bitterest enemies of that society to arouse the
wronged to individual acts of revenge. Quite a number
of notable anarchists have been the product of misery
and oppression. Their souls were warped, and their
minds distorted in childhood by hunger and brutality.
They were wronged terribly by the world, and anarchism
came to them as a welcome spirit, breathing revenge. It
taught that the world was wrong, that injustice rode
over it like a nightmare, that misery flourished in the

SEEKING THE CAUSES 107

midst of abundance, that multitudes labored with bent
backs to produce luxuries for the few. Their eyes were
opened to the wrong of hunger, poverty, unemployment,
of woman and child labor, and of all the miseries that
press heavily upon human souls. And in their revolt
they saw kings, judges, police officials, legislators, cap-
tains of industry, who were said to be directly responsi-
ble for these social ills. It was not society or a system
or even a class that was to blame; it was McKinley, or
Carnot, or Frick. And those whom some worshiped as
heroes, these men loathed as tyrants.

The powerful have thought to deprive the poor of
souls. They have liked to think that they would forever
bear their cross in peace. Yet when anarchism comes
and touches the souls of the poor it finds not dead blocks
of wood or mere senseless cogs in an industrial ma-
chine; it finds the living, who can pray and weep, love
and hate. No matter how seared their souls become,
there is yet a possibility that their whole beings may re-
volt under wrong. When the anarchist deifies even the
veriest wreck of society — this individual, "this god,
though in the germ" — when he inflames it with dignity
and with pride, when he fills its whole being with a
thirst for awful and incredible vengeance, you have Du-
val, Lingg, Ravachol, Luccheni, and Bonnot. Add to
their desire for revenge the philosophy of anarchism and
of our schoolbooks, that individuals are the makers of
history, and the result is terrorism.

Other students of terrorism have noted the preva-
lence of violence in those countries and times where the
courts are corrupt, where the law is brutal and oppres-
sive, or where men are convinced that no available ma-
chinery exists to execute the ends of justice. This lat-
ter is the explanation given for the numerous l)mchings

Io8 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

in America and also for the practices of "popular jus-
tice" that used to be a common feature of frontier life.
In the absence of a properly constituted legal machinery
groups of men undertake to shoot, hang, or burn those
whom they consider dangerous to the public weal. In
Russia it was inevitable that a terrorist movement should
arise. The courts were corrupt, the bureaucracy oppres-
sive. Furthermore, no form of freedom existed. Men
could neither speak nor write their views. They could
not assemble, and until recently they did not possess the
slightest voice in the affairs of government. Borne
down by a most hideous oppression, the terrorist was the
natural product. The same conditions have existed to
an extent in Italy, and probably no other country has
produced so many violent anarchists. Caserio, Luccheni,
Bresci, and Angiolillo have been mentioned, but there
are others, such as Santoro, Mantica, Benedicti, although
these latter are accused of being police agents. In Italy
the people have for centuries individually undertaken to
execute their conception of equity. Official justice was
too costly to be available to the poor, and the courts
were too corrupt to render them justice. For centuries,
therefore, men have been considered justified in murder-
ing their personal enemies. Among all classes it has long
been customary to deal individually with those who have
committed certain crimes. The horrible legal condi-
tions existing in both Spain and Italy have developed
among these peoples the idea of "self-help." They have
taken law into their own hands, and, according to their
lights and passions, have meted out their rude justice.
Assassination has been defended in these countries, as
lynching has been defended recently, as some will re-
member, by a most eminent American anarchist, the Gov-
ernor of South Carolina.

SEEKING THE CAUSES

109

Lombroso says in his exhaustive study of the causes
of violence, Les.Anarchistes: "History is rich in exam-
ples of the complicity of criminality and politics, and
where one sees in turn political passion react on criminal
instinct and criminal instinct on political passion. While
Pompey has on his side all honest people — Cato, Brutus,
Cicero ; Caesar, more popular than he, has as his follow-
ers only degenerates — Antony, a libertine and drunkard ;
Curio, a bankrupt; Clelius, a madman; Dolabella, who
made his wife die of grief and who wanted to annul
all debts; and, above all, Catiline and Clodius. In
Greece the Clefts, who are brigands in time of peace,
have valiantly championed the independence of their
country. In Italy, in i860, the Papacy and the Bour-
bons hired brigands to oppose the national party and its
troops; the Mafia of Sicily rose up with Garibaldi; and
the Camorra of Naples cooperated with the liberals. And
this shameful alliance with the Camorra of Naples is not
yet dissolved ; the last parliamentary struggles relative to
the acts of the government of Naples have given us a
sad echo of it — which, alas, proves that it still lasts with-
out hope of change for the future. It is especially at the
initial stages of revolutions that these sorts of people
abound. It is then, indeed, that the abnormal and un-
healthy spirits predominate over the faltering and the
weak and drag them on to excesses by an actual epi-
demic of imitation." (21)

Marx and Engels saw very clearly the part that the
criminal elements would play in any uprising, and as
early as 1847 they wrote in the Communist Manifesto:
"The 'dangerous class,' the social scum, that passively
rotting mass thrown off by the lowest layers of old so-
ciety, may, here and there, be swept into the movement
by a proletarian revolution; its conditions of life, how-

no VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

ever, prepare it far more for the part of a bribed tool of
reactionary intrigue." (22) The truth of this statement
has been amply illustrated in the numerous outbreaks
that have occurred since it was written. The use by the
Bakouninists in Spain of the criminal elements there,
the repeated exploits of the police agents in discrediting
every uprising by encouraging the criminal elements to
outrageous acts, and the terrible barbarities of the crim-
inal classes at the time of the Paris Commune are all ex-
amples of how useful to reaction the rotting layers of
old society may become. Even when they do not serve
as a bribed tool of the reactionary elements, their atroci-
ties, both cruel and criminal, repel the self-respecting and
conscientious elements. They discredit the real revolu-
tionists, who must bear the stigma that attaches to the
inhuman acts of the "dangerous class."

That the European governments have used the terror-
ists in exactly this manner in order to discredit popular
movements, is not, I think, open to any question. The
money of the anarchists' bitterest enemy has helped to
make anarchy so well known. The politics of Machia-
velH is the politics of nearly every old established Euro-
pean government. It is the politics of families who have
been trained in the profession of rulership. And this
mastership, as William Morris has said, has many shifts.
And one that has been most useful to them is that of
subsidizing those persons or elements who by their acts
promote reaction. In Russia it is an old custom to fo-
ment and provoke minor insurrections. Police agents
enter a discontented district and do all possible to irri-
tate the troublesome elements and to force them "to
come into the street." In this manner the agitators and
leaders are brought to the front, where at one stroke
they may all be shot. Furthermore, the police agents

SEEKING THE CAUSES iii

themselves commit or provoke such atrocious crimes that
the people are terrified and welcome the strong arm of
the Government. Literally scores of instances might be
given where, by well-planned work of this sort, the active
leaders are cut down, the sources of agitation destroyed,
and through the robberies, murders,, and dynamite out-
rages of police agents the people are so terrified that they
welcome the intervention of even tyranny itself.

An immense sensation throughout Europe was created
by an address by Jules Guesde in the French Chamber
of Deputies, the 19th of July, 1894. The deeds of Rava-
chol, Vaillant, and Henry were still the talk of Europe,
and, three weeks before, the President of the Republic
had been stabbed to death by Caserio. It was in , that
critical period, amidst commotions, interruptions, pro-
tests, and exclamations of amazement, that Guesde
brought out his evidence that the chief of police of Paris
had paid regular subsidies to promote and extend both
the preaching and the practice of violent anarchism. He
introduced, in support of his remarks, portions from the
Memoirs of M. Andrieux, our old friend of Lyons and
later the head of the Paris police. "The anarchists," says
Andrieux, "wished to have a newspaper to spread their
doctrines. If I fought their Propaganda of the Deed,
I at least favored the spread of their doctrines by means
of the press, and I have no reasons for depriving my-
self longer of their gratitude.* The companions were
looking for some one to advance funds, but infamous

* Kropotkin tells of the effort made by the agents of Andrieux
to persuade him and Elisee Reclus to collaborate in the publica-
tion of this so-called anarchist paper. He also says it was a
paper of "unheard-of violence; burning, assassination, dynamite
bombs— there was nothing but that in it."— "Memoirs of a Rev-
olutionist," pp. 478-480.

112 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

capital was in no hurry to reply to their appeal. I shook
it up and succeeded in persuading it that it was for its
own interest to aid in the publication of an anarchist
newspaper. . . .

"But do not think that I boldly offered to the an-
archists the encouragement of the Prefect of Police.
. . ., I sent a well-dressed bourgeois to one of the
most active and intelligent of them. He explained that,
having acquired a fortune in the drug business, he de-
sired to devote a part of his income to help their propa-
ganda. This bourgeois, anxious to be devoured, awak-
ened no suspicion among the companions. Through his
hands, I deposited the caution money in the coffers of
the State, and the paper, la Revolution Sociale, made its
appearance. . . . Every day, about the table of the
editors, the authorized representatives of the party of ac-
tion assembled ; they looked over the international corre-
spondence; they deliberated on the measures to be taken
to end 'the exploitation of man by man' ; they imparted to
each other the recipes which science puts at the disposal
of revolution. I was always represented in the councils,
and I gave my advice in case of need. . . . The
members had decided in the beginning that the Palais-
Bourbon must be blown up. They deliberated on the
question as to whether it would not be more expedient
to commence with some more accessible monument. The
Bank of France, the palais de I'&lysee, the house of the
prefect of police, the office of the Minister of the In-
terior were all discussed, then abandoned, by reason of
the too careful surveillance of which they were the ob-
ject." (23) Toward the end of his address, Guesde
turned to the reactionaries, and said : "I have shown you
that everywhere, from the beginning of the anarchist
epidemic in France, you find either the hand or the

SEEKING THE CAUSES II3

money of one of your prefects of police. . . . That
is how you have fought in the past this anarchistic danger
of which you make use to-day to commit, what shall I
say ? . . . real crimes, not only against socialism, but
against the Republic itself." (24)

For the last forty years police agents have swarmed
into the socialist, the anarchist, and the trade-union
movements for the purpose of provoking violence. The
conditions grew so bad in Russia that every revolution-
ist suspected his comrade. Many loyal revolutionists
were murdered in the belief that they were spies. In
the belief that they were comrades, the faithful intrusted
their innermost secrets to the agents of the police. Every
plan they made was known. Every undertaking proved
abortive, because the police knew everything in advance
and frequently had in charge of every plot their own
men. Criminals were turned into the movement under
the surveillance of the police.* All through the days of
the International it was a common occurrence to expose
police spies, and in every national party agents of the po-
lice have been discovered and driven out. It has become
almost a rule, in certain sections of the socialist and labor
movements, that the man who advocates violence must
be watched, and there are numerous instances where such
men have been proved to be paid agents of the police.
Joseph Peukert was for many years one of the foremost
leaders of the anarchists. He was in Vienna with Stell-
macher and Kammerer, and devoted much of his time to
translating into German the works of foreign anarchists.

*In "The Terror in Russia" Kropotkin tells of bands of
criminals who, under pretense of being revolutionists and want-
ing money for revolutionary purposes, forced wealthy people to
contribute under menace of death. The headquarters of the
bands were at the office of the secret police.

114 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

It was only discovered toward the end of his life that
during all this time he was in the employ of the Aus-
trian police.

These and similar startling facts were brought out by
August Bebel in an address delivered in Berlin, Novem-
ber 2, 1898. Luccheni had just murdered the Empress
of Austria, and the German reactionaries attempted, of
course, to connect him with the socialists. Bebel created
utter consternation in their camp when, as a part of his
address, he showed the active participation of high offi-
cials in crimes of the anarchists. "And how often," said
Bebel, "police agents have helped along in the attempted
or executed assassinations of the last decades. When
Bismarck was Federal Ambassador at Frankfort-on-the-
Main he wrote to his wife: 'For lack of material the
police agents lie and exaggerate in a most inexcusable
manner.' These agents are engaged to discover contem-
plated assassinations. Under these circumstances, the
bad fellows among them . . . come easily to the
idea : 'If other people don't commit assassinations, then
we ourselves must help the thing along.' For, if they
cannot report that there is something doing, they will be
considered superfluous, and, of course, they don't want
that to happen. So they 'help the thing along' by 'cor-
recting luck,' as the French proverb puts it. Or they
play politics on their own score.

"To demonstrate this I need only to remind you of
the 'reminiscences' of Andrieux, the former Chief of Po-
lice of Paris, in which he brags with the greatest cynic-
ism of how he, by aid of police funds, subsidized ex-
treme Anarchist papers and organized Anarchist assassi-
nations, just to give a thorough scare to rich citizens.
And then there is that notorious, Police Inspector Mel-
ville, of London, who also operated on these lines. That

SEEKING THE CAUSES II5

was revealed by the investigation of the so-called Wal-
sall attempt at assassination. Among the assassinations
committed by the Fenians there were also some that were
the work of the police, as was shown at the Parnell trial.
Everybody remembers how much of such activity was
displayed in Belgium during the eighties by that prince
of scoundrels, Pourbaix. Even the Minister Bernaard
himself was compelled to admit before the Parliament
that Pourbaix was paid to arrange assassinations in order
to justify violent persecutions of the Social Democracy.
Likewise was Baron von Ungern-Sternberg, nicknamed
the 'bomb-baron,' unmasked as a police agent at the trial
of the Luttich Anarchists.

"And then — our own good friends at the time of the
[anti-] Socialist law. About them I myself could tell
you some interesting stories, for I was among those who
helped to unmask them. There is Schroeder-Brennwald,
of Zurich, the chap who was receiving from Molken-
markt, through police counsellor Krueger, a monthly sal-
ary of at first 200 and then 250 marks. At every meet-
ing in Zurich this Schroeder was stirring up people and
putting them up to commit acts of violence. But to
guard against expulsion from Switzerland by the authori-
ties of that country, he first acquired citizenship in
Switzerland, presumably by means of funds furnished by
the police of Prussia. During the summer of 1883
Schroeder and the police-Anarchist Kaufman called and
held in Zurich a conference participated in by thirteen
persons. Schroeder acted as chairman. At that confer-
ence plans were laid for the assassinations which were
later committed in Vienna, Stuttgart, and Strassburg by
Stellmacher, Kammerer, and Kumitzsch. I am not in-
formed that these unscrupulous scoundrels, although they
were in the service of the police, had informed the police

Il6 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

commissioner that those murders were being contem-
plated. . . . Men like Stellmacher and Kammerer
paid for their acts with their lives on the gallows. When
[Johann] Most was serving a term in a prison in Eng-
land, this same police spy Schroeder had Most's 'Frei-
heit' published at Schaffhausen, Switzerland, at his own
expense. The money surely did not come out of his own
pocket.

"That was a glorious time when [we unmasked this
Schroeder and the other police organizer of plots, Haupt,
to whom] the police counsellor Krueger wrote that he
knew the next attempt on the life of the Czar of Russia
would be arranged in Geneva, and he should send in re-
ports. Was this demand not remarkable in the highest
degree ? And now Herr von Ehrenberg, the former colo-
nel of artillery of Baden ! . . . This fellow was' un-
questionably for good reason suspected of having be-
trayed to the General Staff of Italy the fortifications of
Switzerland at St. Gotthard. When his residence was
searched it was brought to light that Herr von Ehren-
berg worked also in the employ of the Prussian police.
He gave regularly written reports of conversations which
he claimed to have had with our comrades, including me.
Only in those alleged conversations the characters were
reversed. We were represented as advocating the most
reckless criminal plans, which in reality he himself sug-
gested and defended, while he pictured himself in those
reports as opposing the plans. . . . What would
have happened if some day those reports had fallen into
the hands of certain persons — and that was undoubtedly
the purpose — and, if accused, we had no witnesses to
prove the spy committed perfidy? Thus, for instance, he
attempted to convince me — but in his records claimed
that it was I who proposed it — ^that it would be but

SEEKING THE CAUSES II7

child's play to find out the residences of the higher mili-
tary officers in all the greater cities of Germany, then, in
one night, send out our best men and have all those offi-
cers murdered simultaneously. In four articles pub-
lished in the 'Arbeiterstimme,' of Zurich, he explained in
a truly classical manner how to conduct a modern street
battle, what to do to get the best of artillery and cav-
alry. At meetings he urged the collection of funds to
buy arms for our people. As soon as war broke out with
France our comrades from Switzerland, according to
him, should break into Baden and Wuerttemberg, should
there tear up the tracks and confiscate the contents of the
postal and railroad treasuries. And this man, who urged
me to do all that, was, as I said, in the employ of the
Prussian police.

"Another police preacher and organizer of violent
plots was that well-known Friedeman who was driven
out of Berlin, and, at the gatherings of comrades in
Zurich, appealed to them, in prose and poetry, to commit
acts of violence. A certain Weiss, a journeyman tin-
smith, was arrested in the vicinity of Basel for having
put up posters in which the deeds of Kammerer and
Stellmacher were glorified. He, too, was in the employ
of the German police, as was afterward established dur-
ing the court proceedings.

"A certain Schmidt, who had to disappear from Dres-
den on account of his crooked conduct, came to Zurich
and urged the establishment of a special fund for assassi-
nations, contributing twenty francs to start the fund.
Correspondence which he had carried on with Chief of
Police Weller, of Dresden, and which later fell into our
hands, proved that he was in the employ of the police,
whom he kept informed of his actions. And then the
unmasked secret police agent Ihring-Mahlow, here in

Ii8 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

Berlin, who announced that he was prepared to teach the
manufacture of explosives, for 'the parliamentary way
is too slow.' " (25)

Here certainly is a great source of violence and crime,
and, in view of such revelations, no one can be sure that
any anarchist outrage is wholly voluntary and altogether
free from the manipulation of the secret police. With
agents provocateurs swarming over the movement and
working upon the minds of the weak, the susceptible, and
the criminal, there is reason to believe that their influ-
ence in the tragedies of terrorism is far greater than
will ever be known. To discredit starving men on strike,
to defeat socialists in an election, to promote a political
intrigue, to throw the entire legislature into the hands of
the reaction, to conceal corruption, or to take the public
mind from too intently watching the nefarious schemes
of a political-financial conspiracy — for all these and a
multitude of other purposes thousands of secret police
agents are at work. The sordid facts of this infamous
commerce are no longer in doubt, and one wonders how
the anarchists can delude themselves into the belief that
they are serving the weak and lowly when they commit
exactly the same crimes that professional assassins are
hired to commit. This certainly is madness. To be thus
used by their bitterest enemies, the police and the State,
to serve thus voluntarily the forces of intrigue, of re-
action, and of tyranny — surely nothing can be so near to
unreason as this. When Bismarck's personal organ de-
clared again and again, "There is nothing left to be done
but to provoke the social democrats to commit acts of
despair, to draw them out into the open street, and there
to shoot them down," (26) a reasoning opponent would
have seen that this was just what he would not allow
himself to be drawn into. Yet Bismarck hardly says

SEEKING THE CAUSES II9

this and sets his police to work before the anarchist
freely, voluntarily, and with tremendous exaltation of
spirit attempts to carry it out.

Strange to say, the desire of the powerful to promote
anarchy seems to be well enough understood by the an-
archists themselves. Kropotkin, in his "Memoirs," tells
of two cases where police agents were sent to him with
money to help establish anarchist papers, and there was
hardly a moment of his revolutionary career when there
were not police agents about him. Emma Goldman also
appreciates the fact that the police are always ready to
lend a hand in anarchist outrages. "For a number of
years," she says, "acts of violence had been committed
in Spain, for which the anarchists were held responsible,
hounded like wild beasts, and thrown into prison. Later
it was disclosed that the perpetrators of these acts were
not anarchists, but members of the police department.
The scandal became so widespread that the conservative
Spanish papers demanded the apprehension and punish-
ment of the gang leader, Juan Rull, who was subse-
quently condemned to death and executed. The sensa-
tional evidence, brought to light during the trial, forced
Police Inspector Momento to exonerate completely the
anarchists from any connection with the acts committed
during a long period. This resulted in the dismissal of a
number of police officials, among them Inspector Tres-
sols, who, in revenge, disclosed the fact that behind the
gang of police bomb-throwers were others of far higher
position, who provided them with funds and protected
them. This is one of the many striking examples of how
anarchist conspiracies are manufactured." (27) With
knowledge such as this, is it possible that a sane mind
can encourage the despairing to undertake riots and in-
surrections ? Yet when we turn to the anarchists for our

120 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

answer, they tell us "that the accumulated forces in our
social and economic life, culminating in a political act of
violence, are similar to the terrors of the atmosphere,
manifested in storm and lightning. To thoroughly ap-
preciate the truth of this view, one must feel intensely
the indignity of our social wrongs; one's very being
must throb with the pain, the sorrow, the despair mil-
lions of people are daily made to endure. Indeed, unless
we have become a part of humanity, we cannot even
faintly understand the just indignation that accumulates
in a human soul, the burning, surging passion that makes
the storm inevitable." (28) Such explosions of rage
one would expect from the unreasonable and the child-
like. They are bursts of passion that end in the knocking
of one's head against a stone wall. This may in truth be
the psychology of the violent, yet it cannot be the psychol-
ogy of a reasoning mind. This may explain the action of
those who have lost all control over themselves or even
the action of a class that has not advanced beyond the
stages of futile outbursts of passion, of aimless and sui-
cidal violence, and of self-destructive rage. But it is in-
credible that it should be considered by anyone as rea-
sonable or intelligent, or, least of all, revolutionary.

Probably still other causes of terrorism exist, but cer-
tainly the chief are those above mentioned. The writ-
ings of Bakounin, Nechayeff, Kropotkin, and Most; the
miserable conditions which surround the life of a multi-
tude of impoverished people ; the often savage repression
of any attempts on the part of the workers to improve
their conditions ; corrupt courts and parliaments and un-
just laws; a false conception of ethics; a high-wrought
nervous tension combined with compassion; the egocen-
tric philosophy which deifies the individual and would
press its claims even to the destruction of all else in the

SEEKING THE CAUSES 121

world ; these are no doubt the chief underlying causes of
the terrorism of the last forty years. Yet, as I have said,
there is one force making for terrorism that throws a
confusing light on the whole series of tragedies. Why
should the governments of Europe subsidize anarchy?
Why should their secret police encourage outrages, plant
dynamite, and incite the criminal elements to become
anarchists, and in that guise to burn, pillage, and com-
mit murder? Why should that which assumes to stand
for law and order work to the destruction of law and
order? What is it that leads the corrupt, vicious, and
reactionary elements in the ofiScial world to turn thus
to its use even anarchy and terrorism ? What end do the
governments of Europe seek?

I have already suggested the answers to the above
questions, but they will not be understood by the reader
unless he realizes that throughout all of last century the
democratic movement has been to the privileged classes
the most menacing spectacle imaginable. Again and
again it arose to challenge existing society. In some
form, however vague, it lay back of every popular move-
ment. At moments the powerful seemed actually to fear
that it was on the point of taking possession of the
world, and repeatedly it has been pushed back, crushed,
subdued, almost obliterated by their repressive measures.
Yet again and again it arose responsive to the actual
needs of the time, and became toward the end of the
century one of the most impressive movements the world
has ever known. Filled with idealism for a new social
order, and determined to change fundamentally existing
conditions, the working class has fought onward and up-
ward toward a world State and a socialized industrial
life. There can be no doubt that the amazing growth of
the modern socialist movement has terrified the powers

122 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

of industrial and political tyranny. To them it is an
incomparable menace, and superhuman efforts have been
made to turn it from its path. They have endeavored to
divide it, to misinterpret it, to divert it, to corrupt it,
and the greatest of all their efforts has been made to-
ward forcing it to become a movement of terrorists, in
order ultimately to discredit and destroy it. "We have
always been of the opinion," declared an unknown oppo-
nent of socialism, "that it takes the devil to drive out
Beelzebub and that socialism must be fought with an-
archy. As a corn louse and similar insects are driven
out by the help of other insects that devour them and
their eggs, so the Government should cultivate and rear
anarchists in the principal nests of socialism, leaving it
to the anarchists to destroy socialism. The anarchists
will do that work more effectively than either police or
district attorneys." (29) Has this been the chief motive
in helping to keep terrorism alive ?

PART II
STRUGGLES WITH VIOLENCE

KARL MARX

CHAPTER VII

THE BIRTH OF MODERN SOCIALISM

While terrorism was running its tragic course, the so-
cialists grew from a tiny sect into a world-wide move-
ment. And, as terrorist acts were the expression of cer-
tain uncontrollably rebellious spirits, so cooperatives,
trade unions, and labor parties arose in response to the
conscious and constructive effort of the masses. As a
matter of fact, the terrorist groups never exercised any
considerable influence over the actual labor movement,
except for a brief period in Spain and America. In-
deed, they did not in the least understand that move-
ment. The followers of Bakounin were largely young
enthusiasts from the middle class, who were referred to
scornfully at the time as "lawyers without cases, physi-
cians without patients and knowledge, students of bil-
liards, commercial travelers, and others." (i) Yet it
cannot be denied that violence has played, and still in a
measure plays, a part in the labor movement. I mean
the violence of sheer desperation. It rises and falls in
direct relation to the lawlessness, the repression, and the
tyranny of the governments. Furthermore, where labor
organizations are weakest and the masses most ignorant
and desperate, the very helplessness of the workers leads
them into that violence. This is made clear enough by
the historic fact that in the early days of the modern
industrial system nearly every strike of the unorganized

J25

126 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

laborers was accompanied by riots, machine-breaking,
and assaults upon men and property.

No small part of this early violence was directly due
to the brutal opposition of society to every form of labor
organization. The workers were fought violently, and
they answered violence with violence. It must not be
forgotten that the trade unions and the socialist parties
grew, in spite of every menace, in the very teeth of that
which forbade them, and under the eye of that which
sought to destroy them. And, like other living things in
the midst of a hostile environment, they covered them-
selves with spurs to ward off the enemy. The early
movements of labor were marked by a sullen, bitter, and
destructive spirit; and some of the much persecuted
propagandists of early trade unionism and socialism
thought that "implacable destruction" was preferable to
the tyranny which the workers then suffered. Not the
philosophy, but the rancor of Bakounin, of Nechayefi,
and of Most represented, three-quarters of a century ago,
the feeling of great masses of workingmen. Riots, in-
surrections, machine-breaking, incendiarism, pillage, and
even murder were then more truly expressive of the
attitude of certain sections of the brutalized poor toward
the society which had disinherited them than most of us
to-day realize. In every industrial center, previous to
1850, the working-class movement, such as it was, yielded
repeatedly to self-exhausting expressions of blind and
sullen rage. The resentment of the workers was deep,
and, without program or philosophy, a spirit of destruc-
tion often ran riot in nearly every movement of the
workers.

During the first fifty years, then, of last century, little
building was done. A mob spirit prevailed, and the great
body of toilers was divided into innumerable bands, who

THE BIRTH OF MODERN SOCIALISM 127

fought their battles without aim, and, after weeks of
rioting, left nothing behind them. Toward the middle
of the century the real building of the labor movement
commenced. In every country men soberly and seriously
set to work, and everywhere throughout the entire indus-
trial world the foundations were laid for the great move-
ment that exists to-day. Yet the present world-wide
movement, so harmonious in its principles and methods
and so united in doctrines, could not have been all that
it is had there not come to its aid in its most critical and
formative period several of the ablest and best-schooled
minds of Europe. At the period when the workers were
finding their feet and beginning their task of organization
on a large scale, there was also in Europe much revolu-
tionary activity in "intellectual" circles. The forties was
a germinating period for many new social and economic
theories. In France, Germany, and England there were
many groups discussing with heat and passion every the-
ory of trade unionism, anarchism, and socialism. On
the whole, they were middle-class "intellectuals," bat-
tling in their sectarian circles over the evils of our eco-
nomic life, the problems of society, and the relations be-
tween the classes. Suddenly the revolution was upon
them — ^the moment which they all instinctively felt was
at hand — but, when it came, most of them were able to
play no forceful part in it. It was a movement of vast
masses, over which the social revolutionists had little in-
fluence, and the various groups found themselves inca-
pable of any really effective action. To be sure, many
of those seeking a social revolution played a creditable
part in the uprisings throughout Europe during '48 and
'49, but the time had not yet arrived for the working
classes to achieve any striking reforms of their own. The
only notable result of the period, so far as the social

128 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

revoluttonary element was concerned, was that it lost
once again, nearly everywhere, its press, its liberty of
speech, and its right of association. It was driven under-
ground ; but there germinated, nevertheless, in the innu-
merable secret societies, some of the most important prin-
ciples and doctrines upon which the international labor
movement was later to be founded.

In France socialist theories had never been wholly
friendless from the time of the great Revolution. The
memory of the enrages of 1793 and of Babeuf and his
conspiracy of 1795 had been kept green by Buonarotti
and Marechal. The ruling classes had very cunningly
lauded liberty and fraternity, but they rarely mentioned
the struggle for equality, which, of course, appeared to
them as a regrettable and most dangerous episode in the
great Revolution. Yet, despite that fact, this early strug-
gle for economic equality had never been wholly forgot-
ten. Besides, there were Fourier and Saint-Simon, who,
with ' very great scholarly attainments, had rigidly
analyzed existing society, exposed its endless disorders,
and advocated an entire social transformation. There
were also Considerant, Leroux, Vidal, Pecqueur, and
Cabet. All of these able and gifted men had kept the so-
cial question ever to the front, while Louis Blanc and
Blanqui had actually introduced into politics the princi-
ples of socialism. Blanqui was an amazing character.
He was an incurable, habitual insurrectionist, who came
to be called I'enfermS because so much of his life was
spent in- prison.* The authorities again and again re-
leased him, only to hear the next instant that he was
leading a mob to storm the citadels of the Government.
His life was a series of unsuccessful assaults upon au-

* The dramatic story of his life is wonderfully told in L'Eti-
ferme by Gustave Geflfroy. (Paris, 1904.)

THE BIRTH OF MODERN SOCIALISM

129

thority, launched in the hope that, if the working class
should once install itself in power, it would reorganize
society on socialist lines. He was a man of the street,
who had only to appear to find an army of thousands
ready to follow him. Blanqui used to say — according
to Kropotkin — ^that there were in Paris fifty thousand
men ready at any moment for an insurrection. Again
and again he arose like an apparition among them, and on
one occasion, at the head of two hundred thousand peo-
ple, he offered the dictatorship of France to Louis Blanc.
The latter was an altogether different person. His stage
was the parliamentary one. He was a powerful orator,
who, throughout the forties, was preaching his practical
program of social reform — ^the right to work, the organi-
zation of labor, and the final extinction of capitalism by
the growth of cooperative production fostered by the
State. In 1848 he played a great role, and all Europe
listened with astonishment to the revolutionary proposals
of this man who, for a few months, occupied the most
powerful position in France. At the same time Prou-
dhon was developing the principles of anarchism and
earning everlasting fame as the father of that philoso-
phy. In truth, the whole gamut of socialist ideas and
the entire range of socialist methods had been agitated
and debated in peace and in war for half a century in
France.

In England the same questions had disturbed all classes
for nearly fifty years. There had been no great revolu-
tionary period, but from the beginning of the nineteenth
century to the extinction of Chartism in 1848 every doc-
trine of trade unionism, syndicalism, anarchism, and so-
cialism had been debated passionately by groups of
workingmen and their friends. The principles and
methods of trade unionism were being worked out on the

130 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

actual battlefield, amid riots, strikes, machine-breaking,
and incendiarism. Instinctively the masses were asso-
ciating for mutual protection and, almost unconsciously,
working out by themselves programs of action. Never-
theless, Joseph Hume, Francis Place, Robert Owen, and
a number of other brilliant men were lending powerful
intellectual aid to the workers in their actual struggle. A
group of radical economists was also defending the
claims of labor. Charles Hall, William Thompson, John
Gray, Thomas Hodgskin, and J. F. Bray were all seeking
to find the economic causes of the wrongs suffered by la-
bor and endeavoring, in some manner, to devise remedies
for the immense suffering endured by the working
classes. Together with Robert Owen, a number of them
were planning labor exchanges, voluntary communities,
and even at one time the entire reorganization of the
world through the trade unions. In this ferment the co-
operative movement also had its birth. The Rochdale
Pioneers began to work out practically some of the
cooperative ideas of Robert Owen. With £2% a pathetic
beginning was made that has led to the immensely rich
cooperative movement of to-day. Furthermore, the
Chartists were leading a vast political movement of the
workers. In support of the suffrage and of parliamentary
representation for workingmen, a wonderful group of
orators and organizers carried on in the thirties and for-
ties an immense agitation. William Lovett, Feargus
O'Connor, Joseph Rayner Stephens, Ernest Jones,
Thomas Cooper, and James Bronterre O'Brien were
among the notable and gifted men who were then preach-
ing throughout all England revolutionary and socialist
ideas. Such questions as the abolition of inheritances,
the nationalization of land, the right of labor to the full
product of its toil, the necessity of breaking down class

THE BIRTH OF MODERN SOCIALISM 131

control of Parliament — these and other subversive ideas
were germinating in all sections of the English labor
movement. It was a heroic period — altogether the most
heroic period in the annals of toil — in which the most
advanced and varied revolutionary ideas were hurtling
in the air. The causes of the ruin that overcame this
magnificent beginning of a revolutionary working-class
movement cannot be dwelt upon here. Quarrels between
the leaders, the incoherence of their policies, and divi-
sions over the use of violence utterly wrecked a move-
ment that anticipated by thirty years the social democracy
of Germany. The tragic fiasco in 1848 was the begin-
ning of an appalling working-class reaction from years of
popular excesses and mob intoxications, from which the
wiser leadership of the German movement was careful to
steer clear. And, after '48, solemn and serious men set-
tled down to the quiet building of trade unions and
cooperatives. Revolutionary ideas were put aside, and
everywhere in England the responsible men of the move-
ment were pleading with the masses to confine them-
selves to the practical work of education and organiza-
tion.

Although Germany was far behind England in indus-
trial development and, consequently, also in working-
class organization, the beginnings of a labor and socialist
movement were discernible. A brief but delightful
description of the early communist societies is given by
Engels in his introduction to the Revelations sur le
Proces des Communistes. As early as 1836 there were
secret societies in Germany discussing socialist ideas. The
"League of the Just" became later the "League of the
Righteous," and that eventually developed into the
"Communist League." The membership cards read, "All
men are brothers." Karl Schapper, Heinrich Bauer, and

132 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

Joseph Moll, all workingmen, were among those who
made an imposing impression upon Engels. Even more
notable was WeitUng, a tailor, who traveled all over Ger-
many preaching a mixture of Christian communism and
French Utopian socialism. He was a simple-hearted
missionary, delivering his evangel. "The World As It
Is and As It Might Be" was the moving title of one
of his books that attracted to him not only many fol-
lowers among the workers, but also notable men from
other classes. Most of the communists were of course
always under suspicion, and many of them were forced
out of their own countries. As a result, a large number
of foreigners — Scandinavians, Dutch, Hungarians, Ger-
mans, and Italians — found themselves in Paris and in
London, and astonished each other by the similarity of
their views. All Europe in this period was discussing
very much the same things, and not only the more intelli-
gent among the workers but the more idealistic among
the youth from the universities were in revolt, discussing
fervently republican, socialist, communist, and anarchist
ideas. In "Young Germany," George Brandes gives a
thrilling account of the spiritual and intellectual fer-
ment that was stirring in all parts of the fatherland dur-
ing the entire forties. (2)

It was in this agitated period that Marx and Engels,
both mere youths, began to press their ideas in revolu-
tionary circles., They met each other in Paris in 1844,
and there began their lifelong cooperative labors. En-
gels, although a German, was living in England, occu-
pied in his father's cotton business at Manchester. He
had taken a deep interest in the condition of the laboring
classes, and had followed carefully the terrible and often
bloody struggles that so frequently broke out between
capital and labor in England during the thirties and for-

THE BIRTH OF MODERN SOaALISM 133

ties. Arriving by an entirely different route, he had
come to opinions almost identical with those of Marx;
and the next year he persuaded Marx to visit the factory
districts of Lancashire, in order to acquaint himself actu-
ally with the enraged struggle then being fought between
masters and men. Engels had not gone to a university,
although he seems somehow to have acquired, despite his
business cares and active association with the men and
movements of his time, a thorough education. On the
other hand, Marx was a university man, having studied
at Jena, Bonn, and Berlin. Like most of the serious
young men of the period, Marx was a devoted Hegelian-.
When his university days were over, he became the edi-
tor of the Rheinische Zeitung of Cologne, but at the age
of twenty-four he found his paper suppressed because
of his radical utterances. He went to Paris, only to be
expelled in 1845. He found a refuge in Belgium until

1848, when the Government evidently thought it wise that
he should move on. Shortly after, he returned to Ger-
many to take up his editorial work once more, but in

1849, his Neue Rheinische Zeitung was suppressed, and
he was forced to return to Paris. The authorities, not
wishing him there, sent him off to London, where he re-
mained the rest of his life. By the irony of fate, even the
governments of Europe seemed to be conspiring to force
Marx to become the best equipped man of his time. To
the leisure and travel enforced upon him by the Euro-
pean governments was due in no small measure his long
schooling in economic theory, revolutionary political
movements, and working-class methods of action. Both
he and Engels penetrated into every nest of discontent.
They came personally in touch with every group of dissi-
dents. They Spent many weary but invaluable weeks in
the greatest libraries of Europe, with the result that they

134 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

became thoroughly schooled in philosophy, economics,
science, and languages. They pursued, to the minutest
detail, with an inexhaustible thirst, the theories not only
of the "authorities" but also of nearly every obscure so-
cialist, radical, and revolutionist in England, France,
Russia, and Germany.

In Brussels, Paris, and London, around the forties, a
number of brilliant minds seemed somehow or other to
come frequently in contact with each other. Many of
them had been driven out of their own countries, and,
as exiles abroad, they had ample leisure to plan their
great conspiracies or to debate their great theories. Some
of the notable radicals of the period were Heine, Freil-
igrath, Herwegh, Willich, Kinkel, Weitling, Bakounin,
Ruge, Ledru-Rollin, Blanc, Blanqui, Cabet, Proudhon,
Ernest Jones, Eccarius, Marx, Engels, and Liebknecht;
and many of them came together from time to time and,
in great excitement and passion, fought as "Roman to
Roman" over their panaceas. Marx and Engels knew
most of them and spent innumerable hours, not infre-
quently entire days and nights, at a sitting, in their intel-
lectual battles.

It was a most fortunate thing for Marx that the
French Government should have driven him in 1849 to
London. "Capital" might never have been written had
he not been forced to study for a long period the first
land in all Europe in which modern capitalism had ob-
tained a footing. On his earlier visit in 1845 he had
spent a few weeks with Engels in the great factory cen-
ters, and he had been deeply impressed with this new
industrialism and no less, of course, with the English
labor movement. Nothing to compare with it then ex-
isted in France or Germany. As early as 1840 many of
the trades were well organized, and repeated efforts had

THE BIRTH OF MODERN SOaALISM 135

been made to bring them together into a national fed-
eration. How thoroughly Engels knew this movement
and its varied struggles to better the status of labor is
shown in his book, "The Condition of the Working Class
in England in 1844." How thoroughly and fundamen-
tally Marx later came to know not only the actual work-
ing-class movement, but every economic theory from
Adam Smith to John Stuart Mill, and every insurgent
economist and political theorist from William Godwin
to Bronterre O'Brien, is shown in "Capital." In fact,
not a single phase of insurgent thought seemed to escape
Marx and Engels, nor any trace of revolt against the
existing order, whether political or industrial. In Ger-
many they were schooled in philosophy and science; in
France they found ■ themselves in a most amazing f er-
meritation of revolutionary spirit and idealism; and in
England they studied with the minutest care the co-
operative movement and self-help, the trade-union move-
ment with its purely economic aims and methods, the
Chartist movement with its political action, and the
Owenite movement, both in its purely Utopian phases and
in its later development into syndicalist socialism. This
long and profound study placed Marx and Engels in a
position infinitely beyond that of their contemporaries.
Possessed as they were of unusual mental powers, it
was inevitable that such a training should have placed
them in a position of intellectual leadership in the then
rapidly forming working-class organizations of Europe.
The study of English capitalism convinced Marx of
the truthfulness of certain generalizations which he had
already begun to formulate in 1844. It became more
and more evident to him that economic facts, to which
history had hitherto attributed no role or a very inferior
one, constituted, at least in the modern world, a de-

136 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

cisive historic force. "They form the source from which
spring the present class antagonisms. These antago-
nisms in countries where great industry has carried them
to their complete development, particularly in England,
are the bases on which parties are founded, are the
sources of political struggles, are the reasons for all
political history." (3) Although Marx had arrived at
this opinion earlier and had generalized this point of view
in "French-German Annals," his study of English eco-
nomics swept away any possible doubt that "in general
it was not the State which conditions and regulates civil
society, but civil society which conditions and regulates
the State, that it was then necessary to explain politics
and history by economic relations, and not to proceed
inversely." (4) "This discovery which revolutionized
historical science was essentially the work of Marx,"
says Engels, and, with his customary modesty, he adds:
"The part which can be attributed to me is very small.
It concerned itself directly with the working-class move-
ment of the period. Communism in France and Ger-
many and Chartism in England appeared to be some-
thing more than mere chance which could just as well
not have existed. These movements became now a move-
ment of the oppressed class of modern times, the work-
ing class. Henceforth they were more or less developed
forms of the historically necessary struggle which this
class must carry on against the ruling class, the bour-
geoisie. They were forms of the struggle of the classes,
but which were distinguished from all preceding strug-
gles by this fact : the class now oppressed, the proletariat,
cannot effect its emancipation without delivering all so-
ciety from its division into classes, without freeing it
from class struggles. No longer did Communism con-
sist in the creation of a social ideal as perfect as possible;

THE BIRTH OF MODERN SOCIALISM 137

it resolved itself into a clear view of the nature, the con-
ditions, and the general ends of the struggle carried on
by the working class." (5)

It was not the intention of Marx and Engels to com-
municate their new scientific results to the intellectual
world exclusively by means of large volumes. On the
contrary, they plunged into the political movement. Be-
sides having intercourse with xvell-known people, par-
ticularly in the western part of Germany, they were also
in contact with the organized working classes. "Our
duty was to found our conception scientifically, but it was
just as important that we should win over the European,
and especially the German, working classes to our con-
victions. When it was all clear in our eyes, we set to
work." (6) A new German working-class society was
founded in Brussels, and the support was enlisted of the
Deutsche BrUsseler Zeitung, which served as an organ
until the revolution of February. They were in touch
with the revolutionary faction of the English Chartists
under the leadership of George Julian Harney, editor of
The Northern Star, to which Engels contributed. They
also had intercourse with the democrats of Brussels and
with the French social democrats of la Reforme, to
which Engels contributed news of the English and Ger-
man movements. In short, the relations that Marx and
Engels had established with the radical and working-
class organizations fully served the great purposes they
had in mind.

It was in the Communist League that Marx and En-
gels saw their first opportunity to impress their ideas on
the labor movement. At the urgent request of Joseph
Moll, a watchmaker and a prominent member of the
League, Marx consented, in 1847, to present to that or-
ganization his views, and the result was the famous Com-

138 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

munist Manifesto. Every essential idea of modem so-
cialism is contained in that brief declaration. Unfor-
tunately, however, outside of Germany, the Communist
League was an exotic organization that could make little
use of such a program. Its members were mostly ex-
iles, who, by the very nature of their position, were hope-
lessly out of things. Little groups, surrounded by a for-
eign people, exiles are rarely able to affect the move-
ment at home or influence the national movement amid
which they are thrust. There is little, therefore, note-
worthy about the Communist League. It had, to be sure,
gathered together a few able and energetic spirits, and
some of these in later years exercised considerable influ-
ence in the International. But, as a rule, the groups of
the Communist League were little more than debating
societies whose members were filled with sentimental,
visionary, and insurrectionary ideas. Marx himself
finally lost all patience with them, because he could not
drive out of their heads the idea that they could revolu-
tionize the entire world by some sudden dash and
through the exercise of will power, personal sacrifice, and
heroic action. The Communist League, therefore, is
memorable only because it gave Marx and Engels an
opportunity for issuing their epoch-making Manifesto,
that even to-day is read and reread by the workers in all
lands of the world. Translated into every language, it is
the one pamphlet that can be found in every country as
a part of the basic literature of socalism.

There are certain principles laid down in the Com-
munist Manifesto which time cannot affect, although the
greater part of the document is now of historic value
only. The third section, for instance, is a critique of the
various types of socialism then existing in Europe, and
this part can hardly be understood to-day by those un-

THE BIRTH OF MODERN SOCIALISM 139

acquainted with those sectarian movements. It deals
with Reactionary Socialism, Feudal Socialism, Clerical
Socialism, Petty Bourgeois Socialism, German Social-
ism,' Conservative or Bourgeois Socialism, Critical-Uto-
pian Socialism, and Communism. The mere enumeration
of these types of socialist doctrine indicates what a chaos
of doctrine and theory then existed, and it was in order
to distinguish themselves from these various schools
that Marx and Engels took the name of communists.
Beginning with the statement, "The history of all hither-
to existing society is the history of class struggles," (7)
the Manifesto treats at length the modern struggle be-
tween the working class and the capitalist class.
After tracing the rise of capitalism, the develop-
ment of a new working class, and the consequences
to the people of the new economic order, Marx and En-
gels outline the program of the communists and their re-
lation to the then existing working-class organizations
and political parties. They deny any intention of form-
ing a new sect, declaring that they throw themselves
whole-heartedly into the working-class movement of all
countries, with the one aim of encouraging and develop-
ing within those groups a political organization for the
conquest of political power. They outline certain meas-
ures which, in their opinion, should stand foremost in
the program of labor, all of them having to do with some
modification of the institution of property.

In order to achieve these reforms, and eventually "To
wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to
centralize all instruments of production in the hands of
the State," (8) they urge the formation of labor par-
ties as soon as proper preparations have been made and
the time is ripe for effective class action. All through
the Manifesto runs the motif that every class struggle is

140 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

a political struggle. Again and again Marx and Engels
return to that thought in their masterly survey of the
historical conflicts between the classes. They show how
the bourgeoisie, beginning as "an oppressed class under
the sway of the feudal nobility," gradually . . .
"conquered for itself, in the modern representative State,
exclusive political sway," until to-day "the executive of
the modern State is but a committee for managing the
common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie." (9) Tracing
the rise of the modern working class, they tell of its
purely retaliative efforts against the capitalists; how at
first "they smash to pieces machinery, they set factories
ablaze" ; how they fight in "incoherent" masses, "broken
up by their mutual competition"; (10) even their unions
are not so much a result of their conscious effort as they
are the consequence of oppression. Furthermore, the
workers "do not fight their enemies, but the enemies of
their enemies." (ii) "Now and then the workers are
victorious, but only for a time. The real fruit of their
battles lies not in the immediate result, but in the ever-
expanding union of the workers." (12) It is when their
unions grow national in character and the struggle de-
velops into a national struggle between the classes that
it naturally takes on a political character. Then begins
the struggle for conquering political power. But, while
"all previous historical movements were movements of
minorities, or in the interests of minorities, the prole-
tarian movement is the self-conscious, independent move-
ment of the immense majority, in the interest of the im-
mense majority." (13) Returning again to the underly-
ing thought, it is pointed out that the working class must
"win the battle of democracy." (14) It must acquire
"political supremacy." It must raise itself to "the posi-
tion of ruling class," in order that it may sweep away

THE BIRTH OF MODERN SOCIALISM 141

"the conditions for the existence of class antagonisms,
and of classes generally." (15)

Such were the doctrines and tactics proclaimed by
Marx and Engels in 1847. The Manifesto is said to have
been received with great enthusiasm by the League, but,
whatever happened at the moment, it is clear that the
members never understood the doctrines manifested. In
any case, various factions in the movement were still
clamoring for insurrection and planning their conspira-
cies, wholly faithful to the revolution-making artifices
of the period. Two of the most prominent, Willich and
Schapper, were carried away with revolutionary passion,
and "the majority of the London workers," Engels says,
"refugees for the most part, followed them into the camp
of the bourgeois democrats, the revolution-makers." (16)
They declined to listen to protests. "They wanted to go
the other way and to make revolutions," continues En-
gels. "We refused absolutely to do this and the schism
followed." (17)

On the 15th of September, 1850, Marx decided to re-
sign from the central council of the organization, and,
feeling that such an act required some justification, he
prepared the following written declaration : "The minor-
ity * [i. e., his opponents] have substituted the dogmatic
spirit for the critical, the idealistic interpretation of
events for the materialistic. Simple will power, instead
of the true relations of things, has become the motive
force of revolution. While we say to the working peo-
ple : 'You will have to go through fifteen, twenty, fifty
years of civil wars and wars between nations not only to
change existing conditions, but to change yourselves and

*In the authority cited below this appears as "the minority,"
but I notice that in Jaures' "Studies in Socialism," p. 44, it
appears as "the majority."

142 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

make yourselves worthy of political power,' you, on the
contrary, say, 'We ought to get power at once, or else
give up the fight.' While we draw the attention of the
German workman to the undeveloped state of the prole-
tariat in Germany, you flatter the national spirit and the
guild prejudices of the German artisans in the grossest
manner, a method of procedure without doubt the more
popular of the two. Just as the democrats made a sort of
fetish of the words 'the people,' so you make one of the
word 'proletariat.' Like them, you substitute revolu-
tionary phrases for revolutionary evolution." (i8) This
statement of .Marx is one of the most significant docu-
ments of the period and certainly one of the most illumi-
nating we possess of Marx's determination to disavow
the insurrectionary ideas then so prevalent throughout
Europe. Although he had said the same thing before in
other words, there could be no longer any doubt that he
cherished no dreams of a great revolutionary cataclysm,
nor fondled the then prevalent theory that revolutions
could be organized, planned, and executed by will power
alone.

It is clear, therefore, that Marx sa w, as early as 1850,
little revolutionary promise in sectari an or^anizatio^Jsl
secret societies, and political conspiracies., Jie-Ji^ijwwas
past for insurrections, and a real revolution couldonly,
arrive as a result of economic forces and class antago-
nisms. And it is quite obvious "fKaTTiewas becoming more
and more irritated by the sentimentalism and dress-pa-
rade revolutionism of the socialist sects. He looked upon
their projects as childish and theatrical, that gave as little
promise of changing the world's history as battles be-
tween tin soldiers on some nursery floor. He seemed no
longer concerned with ideals, abstract rights, or "eternal
verities." Those who misunderstood him or were little

THE BIRTH OF MODERN SOCIALISM 143

associated with him were horrified at what they thought
was his cynical indifference to such glorious visions as
liberty, fraternity, and equality. Like Darwin, Marx
was always an earnest seeker of facts and forces. He
was laying the foundations of a scientific socialism and
dissecting the anatomy of capitalism in pursuit of the
laws of social evolution. The gigantic intellectual la-
bors of Marx from 1850 to 1870 are to-day receiving
due attention, and, while one after another of the later
economists has been forced reluctantly to acknowledge
his genius, few now will take issue with Professor Al-
bion W. Small when he says, "I confidently predict that
in the ultimate judgment of history Marx will have a
place in social science analogous with that of Gali-
leo in physical science." (19) In exile, and often des-
perate poverty, Marx worked out with infinite care the
scientific basis of the generalization — ^first given to the
world in the Communist Manifesto — that social and po-
litical institutions are the product of economic forces.
In all periods there have been antagonistic economic
classes whose relative power is determined by struggles
between them. "Freedman and slave," he says, "patrician
and plebeian, lord and serf, guild master and journey-
man, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in con-
stant opposition to one another, carried on an uninter-
rupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each
time ended either in a revolutionary reconstruction of
society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending
classes." (20) Here is a summary of that conflict which
Professor Small declares "is to the social process what
friction is to mechanics." (21) It may well be that "the
fact of class struggle is as axiomatic to-day as the fact
of gravitation," (22) yet, when Marx first elaborated his
theory, it was not only a revolutionary doctrine among

144 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

the socialist sects, but like Darwin's theory of evolution
it was assailed from every angle by every school of econ-
omists. The important practical quest ion th at arises out
Qfjhis scieiffific work, and which "partic ulaflyT OBeeTnS
us here', is that this theory of the cE ss' struggle lorever
destroyed the old ideas of revolution, scrap-heaped con-
spiracies and insurrections^ and laidP^e theoretical"
foundations for the modern working:H(Jj|ss^,movernent.

Actually, it was Utopian socialism that was destroyed
by this new theory. It expressed itself in at least three
diverse ways. There were groups of conspirators and
revolutionists who believed that the world was on the
eve of a great upheaval and that the people should pre-
pare for the moment when suddenly they could seize the
governments of Europe, destroy ancient institutions, and
establish a new social order. Another form of utopian-
ism was the eifort to persuade the capitalists themselves
to abolish dividends, profits, rent, and interest, to turn
the factories over to the workers, to become themselves
toilers, and to share equally, one with another, the
products of their joint labor. Still another form of
Utopian socialism was that of Owen, Fourier, and Cabet,
who contemplated the establishment of ideal communi-
ties in which a new world should be built, where all
should be free and equal, and where fraternity would be
based upon a perfect economic communism. Some really
noble spirits in France, England, and America had de-
voted time, love, energy, and wealth to this propaganda
and in actual attempts to establish these Utopias. But
after '48 the upper classes were despaired of. Their
brutal reprisak, their supp ression of, every w orking-class
movement, their ferocious repression of the umons, of
the press, and of the right of ass^nKy— all these ma-
terially aided Marx's theory in disillusi.Qmng many of the

THE BIRTH OF MODERN SOCIALISM 145

philanth ropicajicltender-hearted Utopians. And from
then_on_^^nopeof every sincere advocate of funda-
mental. social changes rested on the woi-king class^^on its'
organizations, its press, and its labors — for the estab-\
lisfiment of the new orde,r._J_„,

The most striking characteristic of thejeriod which
follows was the attempt oT[an_th^sociahst_an^^
sects jo miect t heir ide a s into _the rising labor movement.
With the single exception of Robert Owen in England,
the earlier socialists had ignored the working classes.
All their appeals were made to well-to-do men, and some
of them even hoped that the monarchs of Europe might
be induced to take the initiative. But Marx and Engds
made t heir appe al chiefly to the working class. The^^roj
founH' reaction which"''settlecrover Euro£e^in the years
following"*38' ended aff other dreams, and Jrom^thisjime
on eveiy proposal for a radical change^ in the organization
of society was presented to the workers as the only class
tHaTwasTeal^ seeking, by reason oFits economic subjec-
tion, basic alterations in the institutions of property and
the constitution of the State. The working classes of
Germany, France, England, and other countries had al-
ready begun to form groups for the purpose of discuss-
ing political questions, and the ideas of Marx began to
be propagated in all the centers of working-class activity.

The J)lending o f labor and socialism in most of jthe
countries oi Euro£e_was not, however, a work of ^onths,
but^of _decades. The first great effort to accomplish
tHaFtask occurred in 1864, when the International Work-
ing Men's Association was launched in St. Martin's Hall
in London. During the years from '47 to '64, Marx and
Engels, with their little coterie in London and their cor-
respondents in other countries, spent most of their time
in study, reading, and writing, with little opportunity to

146 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

participate in the actual struggles of labor. Marx was at
work on "Capital" and schooling, in his leisure hours, a
few of the notable men who were later to become lead-
ers of the working class in Europe. It was a dull period,
wearisome and vexatious enough to men who were boldly
prophesying that industrial conditions would create _ a
world-wide solidarity of labor. The first glimmer oi.
hope came with the J^ondon International Exhibition of 1
1862, which brought together by chance groups of work- ^
ingmen from various countries. The visit to London
enabled them to observe the British trade unions, and
they left deeply impressed by their strength. Further-
more, the Exhibition brought the English workers and
those of other nationalities into touch with each other.
How much this meant was shown in 1863. When the
Polish uprising was being suppressed, the English work-
ers sent to their French comrades a protest, in answer
to which the Paris workmen sent a delegation to London.
This gathering in sympathy with Poland laid the foun-
dations for the International. Nearly every important
revolutionary sect in Europe was represented: the Ger-
man communists, the French Blanquists and Proudhon-
ians, and the Italian Mazzinians; but the only delegates
who represented powerful working-class organizations
were the English trade unionists. The other organiza-
tions, even as late as this, were still little more than co-
teries, of hero-worshiping tendencies, fast developing
into sectarian organizations that seemed destined to di-
vide hopelessly and forever the labor movement.

It was perhaps inevitable that the more closely the
sects were brought together, the more clearly they should
perceive their differences, although Marx had exercised
every care to draft a policy that would allay strife. Maz-
zini and his followers could ftot long endure the policies

THE BIRTH OF MODERN SOQALISM 147

of the International, and they soon withdrew. The
Proudhonians never at any time sympathized with the
program and methods adopted by the International.
The German organizations were not able to affiliate, by
reason of the political conditions in that country, al-
though numerous individuals attended the congresses.
Nearly all the Germans were supporters of the policies
of Marx, while most of the leading trade unionists of
England completely understood and sympathized with
Marx's aim of uniting the various working-class organi-
zations of Europe into an international association. They
all felt that such a movement was an historic and eco-
nomic necessity and that the time for it had arrived. They
intended to set about that work and to knit together the
innumerable little organizations then forming in all coun-
' tries. They sought to institute a meeting ground where
the social and political program of the workers could be
formulated, where their views could be clarified, and their
purposes defined. It was not to be a secret organization,
but entirely open and above board. It was not for con-
spiratory action, but for the building up of a great move-
ment. It was not intended to encourage insurrection or
to force ahead of time a revolution. In the opinion of
Marx, as we know, a social revolution was thought to be
inevitable, and the International was to bide its_ time, pre-
paring for the day of its coming, in order to make that
revolution as peaceable and as eifective as possible.

The Preamble of the Provisional Rules of the Inter-
national — entirely the work of Marx — expresses with
sufficient clearness the position of the International. It
was there declared : "That the ^mancipation of the work-
ing classes must be conquered by the. working .classes
ffiJnrsefvesTtHaiOhe'sS'uggle forjhe^emancipation of the
woriang~classes~fnSns not a struggle for class privileges

148 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

and monopolies, but for equal rights and duties, and the
abolition or all class rule;" ■~~'~ — »~«.™^-

"That the economic subjection of the man of labor
to the monopolizer of the means of labor, that is, the
sources of life, lies at the bottom of servitude in all its
forms, of all social misery, mental degradation, and po-
litical dependence ;

"That the economic emancipation of the working
classes is therefore the great end to which every political
movement ought to be subordinate as a means ;

"That all efforts aiming at that great end have hitherto
failed from the want of solidarity between the manifold
divisions of labor in each country, and from the absence
of a fraternal bond of union between the working classes
of different countries ;

"That the emancipation of labor is neither a local nor
a national, but a social problem, embracing all countries
in which modern society exists, and depending for its
solution on the concurrence, practical and theoretical,
of the most advanced countries ;

"That the present revival of the working classes in the
most industrial countries of Europe, while it raises a new
hope, gives solemn warning against a relapse into the
old errors and calls for the immediate combination of the
still disconnected movements." (23) ,,^

In this brief declaration we find the essence of Marx- ]
ian socialism: that the working classes must them- ]
selves work out their own salvation ; that their servitude
is economic; and that all workers must join together in
a political movement, national and international, in order
to achieve their emancipation. Unfortunately, the
Proudhonian anarchists were never able to comprehend
the position of Marx, and in the first congress at Geneva,
in 1866, the quarrels between the various elements gave

THE BIRTH OF MODERN SOCIALISM 149

Marx no little concern. He did not attend that con-
gress, and he afterward wrote to his young friend, Dr.
Kugelmann : "I was unable to go, and I did not wish
to do so, but it was I who wrote the program of the
London delegates. I limited it on purpose to points
which admit of an immediate understanding and common
action by the workingmen, and which give immediately
strength and impetus to the needs of the class struggle
and to the organization of the workers as a class. The
Parisian gentlemen had their heads filled with the most
empty Proudhonian phraseology. They chatter of sci-
ence, and know nothing of it. They scorn all revolution-
ary action, that is to say, proceeding from the class
struggle itself, every social movement that is centralized
and consequently obtainable by legislation through politi-
cal means (as, for example, the legal shortening of th^
working day)." (24) These words indicate that Marx
considered the chief work of the International to be the
building up of a working-class political movement to ob-
tain laws favorable to labor. Furthermore, he was of
the opinion that such work was of a revolutionary na-
ture. '"""
The clearest statement, perhaps, of Marx's idea of the
revolutionary character of political activity is to be
found in the address which he prepared at the request
of the public meeting that launched the International.
He traces there briefly the conditions of the working
class in England. After depicting the misery of the
masses, he hastily reviews the growth of the labor movCi.
ment that ended with the Chartist agitation. Although]
from 1848 to 1864 was a period when the English work-
ing class seemed, he says, "thoroughly reconciled to a
state of political nullity," (25) nevertheless two encour-
aging developments had taken place. One was the vie-

150 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

tory w5n by the working classes in carrying the Ten
Hours Bill. It was "not only a great practical success;
it was the victory of a principle ; it was the first time that
in broad daylight the political economy of the middle
class succumbed to the political economy of the working

~class." (26) The other victory was the growth of the
cooperative movement. "The value of these great social

'experiments cannot be overrated," he says. "By deed,
instead of by argument, they have shown that production
on a large scale, and in accord with the behests of mod-
ern science, may be carried on without the existence of
a class of masters employing a class of hands." (27)
Arguing that cooperative labor should be developed to
national dimensions and be fostered by State funds, he
urges working-class political action as the means to
achieve this end. "To conquer political power has there-
fore become the great duty of the working classes." (28)
This is the conclusion of Marx concerning revolutionary
methods; and it is clear that his conception of "revolu-
tionary action" differed not only from that of the Prou-
dhonians and Mazzinians, but also from that of "the
bourgeois democrats, the revolution-makers," (29) who
"extemporized revolutions." (30)

At the end of Marx's letter to Kugelmann, he tells of
the beginning already made by the International in Lon-
don in actual political work. "The movement for elec-
toral reform here," he writes, "which our General Coun-
cil (quorum magna pars) created and launched, has as-
sumed dimensions that have kept on growing until now
they are irresistible." (31) The General Council threw
itself unreservedly into this agitation. An electoral re-
form conference was held in February, 1867, attended
by two hundred delegates from all parts of England,
Scotland, and Ireland. Later, gigantic mass meetings

THE BIRTH OF MODERN SOCIALISM 151

were held throughout the country to bring pressure upon
the Government. Frederic Harrison and Professor E.
S. Beesly, well known for their sympathy with labor,
were appealing to the working classes to throw their
energies into the fight. "Nothing will compel the ruling
classes," wrote Harrison in 1867, "to recognize the
rights of the working classes and to pay attention to
their just demands until the workers have obtained po-
litical power." (32) Professor Beesly, the intimate
friend of Marx, was urging the unions to enter politics
as an independent force, on the ground that the difference
between the Tories and the Liberals was only the differ-
ence between the upper and nether millstones. In all this
agitation Marx saw, of course, the working out of his
own ideas for the upbuilding of a great independent
political organization of the working class. All the ener-
gies of the General Council of the International were,
therefore, devoted to the political struggle of the British
workers. However, in all this campaign, emphasis was
placed upon the central idea of the association — that
political power was wanted, in order, peaceably and
legally, to remedy economic wrongs. The wretche d con-
dition^_the _workers_in the jndustnaj towns and the
even greater misery of the Irish peasants and English
far m laborer s were the bases of all agitation. lA^'hile
occupied at this time chiefly with the economic and po-
litical struggles in Britain, the General Council was also
keeping a sharp eye on similar conditions in Europe and
America. When Lincoln was chosen President for the
second time, a warm address of congratulation was sent
to the American people, expressing joy that the sworn
enemy of slavery had been again chosen to represent
them. More than once the International communicated
with Lincoln, and perhaps no words more perfectly ex-

152 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

press the ideal of the labor movement than those that
Lincoln once wrote to a body of workingmen: "The
strongest bond of human sympathy, outside of the family
relation, should be one uniting all working people, of all
nations, and tongues, and kindreds." (33)

To unite thus the workers of all lands and to organ^
ize them into great political parties were the chief aims
of Marx in the International. And in 1869 it seemed
that this might actually be accomplished in a few years.
In France, Belgium, Switzerland, Germany, Austria,
lltaly, and other countries the International was making
' rapid headway. Nearly all the most important labor ,
bodies of Europe were actually affiliated, or at least \
friendly, to the new movement. At all the meetings^
held there was enthusiasm, and the future of the Inter-
national seemed very promising indeed. It was recog-
nized as the vehicle for expressing the views of labor
throughout Europe. It had formulated its principles and
tactics, and had already made a creditable beginning in
the gigantic task before it of systematically carrying on
its agitation, education, and organization. Marx's ener-
gies were being taxed to the utmost. Nearly all the im-
mense executive work of the International fell on him,
and nearly every move made was engineered by him.
Yet at that very time he was on the point of publishing
the first volume of "Capital," the result of gigantic re-
searches into industrial history and economic theory.
This great work was intended to be, in its literal sense,
the Bible of the working class, as indeed it has since be-
come. Cerainly, Jaures' tribute to Marx is well de-
served and fairly sums up the work accomplished by him
in the period 1847-1869. "To Marx belongs the
merit," he says, "... of having drawn together
and unified the labor movement and the socialist idea.

THE BIRTH OF MODERN SOCIALISM 153

In the first third of the nineteenth century labor strug-
gled and fought against the crushing power of capital;
but it was not conscious itself toward what end it was
straining; it did not know that the true objective of its
effort was the common ownership of property. And, on
the other hand, socialism did not know that the labor
movement was the living form in which its spirit was
embodied, the concrete practical force of which it stood
in need. Marx was the most clearly convinced and the
most powerful among those who put an end to the em-
piricism of the labor movement and the utopianism of the
socialist thought, and this should always be remembered
to his credit. By a crowning application of the Hegelian_
method, he united the Idea and the Fact, thought and
history. He enriched the practical movement by the
i dea, and to the theory he added practice ; he brought the
sociali st thought into proletarian life, and proletarian
life into socialist thought^ From that time on socialism
arid the proletariat became inseparable." (34)

CHAPTER VIII

THE BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN

At the moment when the future of the International
seemed most promising and the poHtical ideas of Marx
were actually taking root in nearly all countries, an appli-
cation was received by the General Council in London
to admit the Alliance of Social Democracy. This, we will
remember, was the organization that Bakounin had
formed in 1868 and was the popular section of that re-
markable secret hierarchy which he had endeavored to
establish in 1864. The General Council declined to ad-
mit the Alliance, on grounds which proved later to be
well founded, namely, that schisms would undoubtedly be
encouraged if the International should permit an organi-
zation with an entirely different program and policies to
join it in a body. Nevertheless, the General Council de-
clared that the members of the Alliance could affiliate
themselves as individuals with the various national sec-
tions. After considerable debate, Bakounin and his fol-
lowers decided to abandon the Alliance and to join the
International. Whether the Alliance was in fact abol-
ished is still open to question, but in any case Bakounin
appeared in the International toward the end of the six-
ties, to challenge all the theories of Marx and to offer,
in their stead, his own philosophy of universal revolu-
tion. Anarchism as the end and terrorism as the means
were thus injected into the organization at its most form-
ative period, when the laboring classes of all Europe had

IS4

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN 155

just begun to write their program, evolve their princi-
ples, and define their tactics. With great force and mag-
netism, Bakounin undertook his war upon the General
Council, and those who recall the period will realize that
nothing could have more nearly expressed the occa-
sional spirit of the masses — the very spirit that Marx and
Engels were endeavoring to change — than exactly the
methods proposed by Bakounin.
/ Whether it were better to move gradually and peace-
I fully along what seemed a never-ending road to emanci-
I pation or to begin the revolution at once by insurrection
land civil war — this was in reality the question which,
jfrom that moment on, agitated the International. It had
plways troubled more or less the earlier organizations of

(labor, and now, aided by Bakounin's eloquence and fiery
revolutionism, it became the great bone of contention
(throughout Europe. The struggles in the International
^ptween those who became known later as the anarchists
and the socialists remind one of certain Greek stories,
in which the outstanding figures seem to impersonate
mighty forces, and it is not impossible that one day they
may serve as material for a social epic. We all know
to-day the interminable study that engages the the-
ologians in their attempts to describe the battles and
schisms in the early Christian Church. And there can
be no doubt that, if socialism fulfills the purpose which
its advocates have in mind, these early struggles in its
history will become the object of endless research and
commentary. The calumnies, the feuds, the misunder-
standings, the clashing of doctrines, the antagonism of
the ruling spirits, the plots and conspiracies, the victories
and defeats — ^all these various phases of this war to the
death between socialists and anarchists — will in that case
present to history the most vital struggle of this age.

156 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

But, whatever may be the outcome of the socialist move-
ment, it is hardly too much to say that to both an-
archists and socialists these struggles seemed, at the
time they were taking place, of supreme importance to
the destinies of humanity.

The contending titans of this war were, of course,
Karl Marx and Michael Bakounin. It is hardly neces-
sary to go into the personal feud that played so con-
spicuous a part in the struggle between them. Perhaps
no one at this late day can prove what Marx and his
friends themselves were unable to prove — ^although they
never ceased repeating the allegations — that Bakounin
was a spy of the Russian Government, that his life had
been thrice spared through the influence of that Govern-
ment, that he was treacherous and dishonest, and that his
sole purpose was to disrupt and destroy the International
Working Men's Association. Nor is it necessary to con-
sider the charges made against Marx — some of them
time has already taken care of — that he was domineering,
malicious, and ambitious, that his spirit was actuated by
intrigue, and that, when he conceived a dislike for any-
one, he was merciless and conscienceless in his warfare
on that one. Incompatibility of temperament and of
personality played its part in the battles between these
two, but, even had there been no mutual dislike, the dif-
ferences between their principles and tactics would have
necessitated a battle d outrance.

For twenty years before the birth of the International,
Marx and Bakounin had crossed and recrossed each
other's circle. They had always quarreled. There was a
mutual fascination, due perhaps to an innate antagonism,
that brought them again and again together at critical
periods. At times there seemed a chance of reconcilia-
tion, but they no more touched each other than imme-

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN 157

diately there flared forth the old animosity. When Ba-
kounin left Russia in 1843, he met Proudhon and Marx
in Paris. At that period the doctrines of all three were
germinating. Bakounin had already written, "The de-
sire for destruction is at the same time a creative de-
sire." ( I ) Proudhon had begun to formulate the princi-
ples of anarchism, and Marx the principles of socialism.
"He was much more advanced than I was," wrote Ba-
kounin of Marx at this period. "I knew nothing
then of political economy, I was not yet freed from
metaphysical abstraction, and my socialism was only in-
stinctive. . . .It was precisely at this epoch that
he elaborated the first fundamentals of his present sys-
tem. We saw each other rather often, for I respected
him deeply for his science and for his passionate and
serious devotion, although always mingled with personal
vanity, to the cause of the proletariat, and I sought with
eagerness his conversation, which was always instructive
and witty — when it was not inspired with mean hatred,
which, too often, alas, was the case. Never, however,
was there frank intimacy between us. Our tempera-
ments did not allow that. He called me a sentimental
idealist, and he was right ; I called him a vain man, per-
fidious and artful, and I was right also." (2) This mu-
tual dislike and even distrust subsisted to the end.

Certain events in 1848 widened the gulf between them.
At the news of the outbreak of the revolution in Paris,
hundreds of the restless spirits hurried there to take a
hand in the situation. And after the proclamation of the
Republic they began to consider various projects of car-
rying the revolution into their own countries. Plans were
being discussed for organizing legions to invade foreign
countries, and a number of the German communists en-
tered heartily into the plan of Herwegh, the erratic Ger-

158 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

man poet — "the iron lark" — who led a band of revolu-
tionists into Baden. "We arose vehemently against these
attempts to play at revolution," says Engels, speaking
for himself and Marx. "In the state of fermenta-
tion which then existed in Germany, to carry into our
country an invasion which was destined to import the
revolution by force, was to injure the revolution in
Germany, to consolidate the governments, and . . .
to deliver the legions over defenseless to the German
troops." (3) Wilhelm Liebknecht, then twenty-two
years of age, who was in favor of Herwegh's project,
wrote afterward of Marx's opposition. Marx "under-
stood that the plan of organizing 'foreign legions' for
the purpose of carrying the revolution into other coun-
tries emanated from the French bourgeois-republicans,
and that the 'mov^patia^ had been artificially inspired
with the twofold intention of getting rid of troublesome
elements and of carrying off the foreign laborers whose
competition made itself doubly felt during this grave
business crisis." (4)

Undeterred by Marx, Herwegh marshaled his
"legions" and entered Baden, to be utterly crushed, ex-
actly as Marx had foreseen. A quarrel then arose be-
tween Marx and Bakounin over Herwegh's project. Far
from changing Marx's mind, however, it made him sus-
pect Bakounin as perhaps in the pay of the reactionaries.
In any case, he made no effort to prevent the Neue
Rheinische Zeitung from printing shortly after the fol-
lowing: "Yesterday it was asserted that George Sand
was in possession of papers which seriously compro-
mised the Russian who has been banished from here,
Michael Bakounin, and represented him as an instru-
ment or an agent of Russia, newly enrolled, to whom is
attributed the leading part in the recent arrest of the

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN 159

unfortunate Poles. George Sand has shown these pa-
pers to some of her friends." (5) Marx later printed
Bakounin's answer to these charges — which were, in fact,
groundless — and in his letters to the New York Tribune
(1852) even commended Bakounin for his services in the
Dresden uprising of 1849. (6) Nevertheless, there is
no doubt that to the end Marx believed Bakounin to be
a tool of the enemy. These quarrels are important only
as they are prophetic in thus early disclosing the gulf
between Marx and Bakounin in their conception of revo-
lutionary activity. Although profoundly revolutionary,
Marx was also rigidly rational. He had no patience, and
not an iota of mercy, for those who lost their heads
and attempted to lead the workers into violent out-
breaks that could result only in a massacre. On this
point he would make no concessions, and anyone who at-
tempted such suicidal madness was in Marx's mind
either an imbecile or a paid agent provocateur. The fail-
ure of Herwegh's project forced Bakounin to admit later
that Marx had been right. Yet, as we know, with Ba-
kounin's advancing years the passion for insurrections
became with him almost a mania.

If this quarrel between Bakounin and Marx casts a
light upon the causes of their antagonism, a still greater
illumination is shed by the differences between them
which arose in 1849. Bakounin, in that year, had writ-
ten a brochure in which he developed a program for the
union of the revolutionary Slavs and for the destruction
of the three monarchies, Russia, Austria, and Prussia.
He advocated pan-Slavism, and believed that the Slavic
people could once more be united and then federated
into a great new nation. When Marx saw the volume, he
wrote in the Neue Rheinische Zeitung (February 14,
1849), "Aside from the Poles, the Russians, and perhaps

l6o VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

even the Slavs of Turkey, no Slavic people has a future,
for the simple reason that there are lacking in all the other
Slavs the primary conditions — historical, geographical,
political, and industrial — of independence and vital-
ity-" (7) This cold-blooded statement infuriated Ba-
kounin. He absolutely refused to look at the facts. Pos-
sessed of a passion for liberty, he wanted all nations, all
peoples — civilized, semi-civilized, or savage — to be en-
tirely free. What had historical, geographical, political, or
industrial conditions to do with the matter? All this is
typical of Bakounin's revolutionary sentimentalism. He
clashed again with Marx on very similar grounds when
the latter insisted that only in the more advanced coun-
tries is there a possibility of a social revolution. Mod-
ern capitalist production, according to Marx, must at-
tain a certain degree of development before it is possible
for the working class to hope to carry out any really
revolutionary project. Bakounin takes issue with him
here. He declares his own aim to be "the complete and
real emancipation of all the proletariat, not only of some
countries, but of all nations, civilized and non-civi-
lized. (8) In these declarations the differences between
Marx and Bakounin stand forth vividly. Marx at no
time states what he wishes. He expresses no sentiment,
but confines himself to a cold statement of the facts as
he sees them. Bakounin, the dreamer, the sentimentalist,
and the revolution-maker, wants the whole world free.
Whether or not Marx wants the same thing is not the
question. He rigidly confines himself to what he believes
is possible. He says certain conditions must exist before
a people can be free and independent. Among them are
included historical, geographical, political, and industrial
conditions. Marx further states that, before the work-
ing-class revolution can be successful, certain economic

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN i6l

conditions must exist. Marx is not stating here conclu-
sions which are necessarily agreeable to him. He states
only the results of his study of history, b ased on his
analysis of past events. In the one case we find thel
idealist seeking to set the world violently right; in the
other case we find the historian and the scientist — in-
fluenced no doubt, as all men must be, by certain hopes,
yet totally regardless of personal desire — stating the
antecedent conditions which must exist previous to the
birth of a new historic or economic period.

In speaking of the antagonism between Marx and Ba-
kounin in this earlier period, I do not mean to convey
the impression that it was the cause of the dissensions
that arose later. The slightest knowledge of Bakou-
nin's philosophy anT methods'"is "enough to make one
realizetEi/Fneither the International nor an;;^ considerable
section of the labor or socialist movements had anything
in c ommon wiflTtHos'eli^Seas! Certainly the thou g ht and
policies of Marx were directly opposed to everythmg
from first to last tliat BakounmstoodTon NotHiiig"could
be" mb r e~^^esque thaiT the Tdea" tliatM arxism and Ba-
kouninism could be blended, or indeed exist together,
in any semblance of harmony. Every thought, policy,
and method of the two clashed furiously. It would be
impossible to conceive of two other minds that were on
so many points such worlds apart. Both Bakounin and
Marx instinctively felt this essential antagonism, yet the
former wrote Marx, in December, 1868, when he was
preparing to enter the International, assuring him that he
had had a change of heart and that "my country, now,
c'est r Internationale, of which you are one of the princi-
pal founders. You see then, dear friend, that I am your
disciple and I am proud to be it." (9) He then signs him-
self affectionately, "Your devoted M. Bakounin." (10)

l62 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

With an olive branch such as that arrived the new
"disciple" of Marx. He then set to work without a mo-
ment's delay to capture the International congress which
was to be held at Basel, September, 1869. And it was
there that the first battle occurred. From the very mo-
ment that the congress opened it was clear that on every
important question there was to be a division. Most
unexpectedly, the first struggle arose over a question
that seemed not at all fundamental at the time, but which,
as the later history of socialism shows, was really basic.
The father of direct legislation, Rittinghausen, was a
delegate to the congress from Germany. He begged the
congress for an opportunity to present his ideas, and he
won the support, quite naturally, of the Marxian ele-
ments. In his preliminary statement to the congress he
said: "You are going to occupy yourselves at length
with the great social reforms that you think necessary in
order to put an end to the deplorable situation of the la-
bor world. Is it then less necessary for you to occupy
yourselves with methods of execution by which you may
accomplish these reforms ? I hear many among you say
that you wish to attain your end by revolution. Well,
comrades, revolution, as a matter of fact, accomplishes
nothing. If you are not able to formulate, after the
revolution, by legislation, your legitimate demands, the
revolution will perish miserably like that of 1848. You
will be the prey of the most violent reaction and you will
be forced anew to suffer years of oppression and dis-
grace.

"What, then, are the means of execution that democ-
racy will have to employ in order to realize its ideas?
Legislation by an individual functions only to the advan-
tage of that individual and his family. Legislation by a
group of capitalists, called representatives, serves only

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN 163

the interests of this class. It is only by taking their in-
terests into their own hands, by direct legislation, that
the people can . . . establish the reign of social jus-
tice. I insist, then, that you put on the program of this
congress the question of direct legislation by the peo-
pie." (II)

The forces led by Bakounin and Professor Hins, of
Belgium, opposed any consideration of this question. The
latter, in elaborating the remarks of Bakounin, declared :
"They wish, they say, to accomplish, by representation
or direct legislation, the transformation of the present
governments, the work of our enemies, the bourgeois.
They wish, in order to do this, to enter into these gov-
ernments, and, by persuasion, by numbers, and by new
laws, to establish a new State. Comrades, do not follow
this line of march, for we would perish in following it in
Belgium or in France as elsewhere. Rather let us leave
these governments to rot away and not prop them up
with our morality. This is the reason : the International
is and must be a State within States. Let these States
march on as they like, even to the point where our State
is the strongest. Then, on their ruins, we will place ours,
all prepared, all made ready, such as it exists in each sec-
tion." (12) The result of this debate was that the fa-
ther of direct legislation was not allowed time to pre-
sent his views, and it is significant that this first clash of
the congress resulted in a victory for the anarchists, de-
spite all that could be done by Liebknecht and the other
socialists.

The chief question on the program was the considera-
tion of the right of inheritance. This was the main eco-
nomic change desired by the Alliance. For years
Bakounin had advocated the abolition of the right of in-
heritance as the most revolutionary of his economic de-

l64 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

mands. "The right of inheritance," declared Bakounin,
"after having been the natural consequence of the vio-
lent ajjpropriation of natural and social wealth, became
later the basis of the political state and of the legal fam-
ily. . . . It is necessary, therefore, to vote the aboli-
tion of the right of inheritance." (13) It was left to
George Eccarius, delegate of the Association of Tailors
of London, to present to that congress the views of Marx
and the General Council. The report of the General
Council was, of course, prepared in advance, but Bakou-
nin's views were well known, and it was intended as a
crushing rejoinder. "Inheritance," it declared, "does not
create that power of transferring the produce of one
man's labor into another man's pocket — it only relates
to the change in the individuals who yield {sic) that
power. Like all other civil legislation, the laws of inheri-
tance are not the cause, but the effect, the juridical conse-
quence of the existing economical organisation of society,
based upon private property in the means of production,
that is to say, in land, raw material, machinery, etc. In
the same way the right of inheritance in the slave is not
the cause of slavery, but, on the contrary, slavery is
the cause of inheritance in slaves. ... To proclaim
the abolition of the right of inheritance as the starting
point of the social revolution would only tend to lead
the working class away from the true point of attack
against present society. It would be as absurd a thing
as to abolish the laws of contract between buyer and
seller, while continuing the present state of exchange of
commodities. It would be a thing false in theory and
reactionary in practice." (14) Despite the opposition of
the Marxians at the congress, the proposition of Bakou-
nin received thirty-two votes as against twenty-three
given to the proposition of the General Council. As thir-

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN 165

teen of the delegates abstained from voting, Bakounin's
resolution did not obtain an absolute majority, and the
question was thus left undecided.

Another important discussion at the congress was on
landed property. Some of the delegates were opposed to
the collective ownership of land, believing that it should
be divided into small sections and left to the peasants
to cultivate. Others advocated a kind of communism, in
which associations of agriculturists were to work the
soil. Still others believed that the State should own the
land and lease it to individuals. Indeed, almost every
phase of the question was touched, including the means
of obtaining the land from the present owners and of
distributing it among the peasants or of owning it col-
lectively while allowing them the right to cultivate it for
their profit. On this subject, again, Eccarius presented
the views of Marx. To Bakounin, who expressed his
terror of the State, no matter of what character, Ec-
carius said "that his relations with the French have
doubtless communicated to him this conception (for it
appears that the French workingmen can never think of
the State without seeing a Napoleon appear, accompanied
by a flock of cannon), and he replied that the State can
be reformed by the coming of the working class into
power. All great transformations have been inaugurated
by a change in the form of landed property. The al-
lodial system was replaced by the feudal system, the
feudal system by modern private ownership, and the so-
cial transformation to which the new state of things
tends will be inaugurated by the abolition of individual
property in land. As to compensations, that will depend
on the circumstances. If the transformation is made
peacefully, the present owners will be indemnified.
. . . If the owners of slaves had yielded when Lin-

l66 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

coin was elected, they would have received a compensa-
tion for their slaves. Their resistance led to the abolition
of slavery without compensation . . ." (15) The
congress, after debating the question at length, contented
itself with voting the general proposition that "society
has the right to abolish private property in land and to
make land the property of the community." (16)

The la st import antjquestion cons idered by the congress
was that dealing with trade unions. The debate arSnsed:
little interest^" although EieBKneclir~qpeiie3~ffig"'^lscvrs-
sion. He pointed out the great "exteiisioh oFtf ade-union
organization in England, Germany, and America, and he
tried to impress upon the congress the necessity for vastly
extending this form of solidarity. And, indeed, it seems
to have been generally admitted that trade-union organi-
zation was necessary. No practical proposals were, how-
ever, made for actually developing such organizations.
The interesting part of the discussion came upon the
function of trade: unionism in future society. The so-
cialists were IMe concerned, as to what mighLJiappinlo
the trade unions in future society, but Pro fess or Hins
6u'ft^fled"a^that■c61tgtegs the program of the modern syit-
dicalists. It is, tKerefbre, especially interesting" to "read
what~RiofessQr.Hins_saidas.eaxl^as iSfigi^^^ocieties de
resistance ( trade u nions) ^ill subsist after the suppres-
sion of wages, not in name, but in deed! They will then
be the organization of labor, . . . 6pS;^ng~a vasT
distribulToirof^abor Tr'bm" onV end ofjthe jvorld To, the^
otKr. TK^ will replace the. ancient politic al systems :
in place"of "a' confused and heterogeneous re£resentation,
there will be the representatio n of la^nr.

""They will be at the same time agents of decentraliza-
tion, for the centers will differ according to the indus-
tries which will form, in some manner, each one a sep-

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN 167

arate State, and will prevent forever the return to the
ancient form of centralized State, which will not, how-
ever, prevent another form of government for local pur-
poses. As is evident, if we are reproached for being in-
different to every form of government, it is . . . be-
cause we detest them all in the same way, and because we
believe that it is only on their ruins that a society con-
forming to the principles of justice can be estab-
lished." * (17)

The congress at Basel was the turning point in the
brief history of the International. Although the Marx-
ists were reluctant to admit it, the Bakouninists had won
a complete victory on every important issue. Some of
the decisions future congresses might remedy, but in re-
fusing even to discuss the question of direct legislation

* In the English report of the discussion Professor Hins's
remarks are summarized as follows : "Hins said he could not
agree with those who looked upon trade societies as mere strike
and wages' societies, nor was he in favor of having central com-
mittees made up of all trades. The present trades unions would
some day overthrow the present state of political organization
altogether; they represented the social and political organization
of the future. The whole laboring population would range it-
self, according to occupation, into different groups, and this
would lead to a new political organization of society. He
wanted no intermeddling of the State; they had enough of that
in Belgium already. As to the central committees, every trad"
ought to have its central committee at the principal seat of
manufacture. The central committee of the cotton trades ought
to be at Manchester; that of the silk trades at Lyons, etc. He
did not consider it a disadvantage that trade unions kept aloof
more or less from politics, at least in his country. By trying to
reform the State, or to take part in its councils, they would vir-
tually acknowledge its right of existence. Whatever the Eng-
lish, the Swiss, the Germans, and the Americans might hope to
accomplish by means of the present political State the Belgians
repudiated theirs."— pp. 31-2.

l68 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

many of the delegates clearly showed their determination
to have nothing to do with politics or with any movement
aiming at the conquest of political power. In all the
discussions the anarchist tendencies of the congress were
unmistakable, and the immense gulf between the Marx-
ists and the Bakouninists was laid bare. The very foun-
dation principles upon which the International was based
had been overturned. Political action was to be abafl^
doned, while the discussion on trade unions introduced '
for the first time in the International the idea of a purely
economic struggle and a conception of future society in
which groups of producers, and not the State or the com-
munity, should own the tools of production. This syn-
dicalist conception of socialism was not new. Developed
for thejSrst time by Robert Xteffl»io.-JES33*Jit_hgd Jsd ■
I the working classes into the _ most vi olent and bitter /
(Strikes, that ended jn disaster for all partidBaiitS~— BQrnT
jagain in 1869, it was destined, to lie do rmant for thirtW
I years," then to bejtaken up once, more — this time w ith
' iinmehse enffiiisiasm — ^by the French trade unions. -'^
""^^■gedless- to 'gay,"lhe decisive victory" of "fHlTBafeou-'!
ninists at Basel was excessively annoying and humiliat*'^ ■
ing to Marx. He did not attend in person, but it was
evident before the congress that he fully expected that
his forces would, on that occasion, destroy root and
branch the economic and political fallacies of Bakounin.
He rather welcomed the discussion of the differences be-
tween the program of the Alliance and that of the Inter-
national, in order that Eccarius, Liebknecht, and others
might demolish, once and for all, the reactionary pro-
posals of Bakounin. To Marx, much of the program
of the Alliance seemed a remnant of eighteenth-century
philosophy, while the rest was pure utopianism, consist-
ing of unsound and impractical reforms, mixed with

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN 169

atheism and schoolboy declamation. Altogether, the poli-
cies and projects of Bakounin seemed so vulnerable that
the General Council evidently felt that little preparation
was necessary in order to defeat them. They seemed to
have forgotten, for the moment, that Bakounin was an
old and experienced conspirator. In any case, he had
left no stone unturned to obtain control of the congress.
Week by week, previous to the congress, I'Egalite, the
organ of the Swiss federation, had published articles by
Bakounin which, while professedly explaining the prin-
ciples of the International, were in reality attacking them ;
and most insidiously Bakounin's own program was pre-
sented as the traditional position of the organization.
Liberty, fraternity, and equality were, of course, called
into service. The treason of certain working-class poli-
ticians was pointed out as the natural and inevitable re-
sult of political action, while to those who had given
little thought to economic theory the abolition of in-
heritances seemed the final word. Nor did Bakounin
limit his efforts to his pen. All sections of the Alliance
undertook to see that friends of Bakounin were sent as
delegates to the congress, and it was charged that cre-
dentials were obtained in various underhanded ways.
However that may have been, the "practical," "cold-
blooded" Marx was completely outwitted by his "senti-
mental" and "visionary" antagonist. Instead of a great
victory, therefore, the Marxists left the congress of Basel
utterly dejected, and !pccarius is reported to have said,
"Marx will be terribly annoyed." (18)

That Marx was annoyed is to put it with extraordi-
nary moderation, and from that moment the fight on Ba-
kouninism, anarchism, and terrorism developed to, a
white heat. Immediately after the adjournment of the
congress, Moritz Hess, a close friend of Marx and a

170 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

delegate to the congress, published in the Reveil of Paris
what he called "the secret history" of the congress, in
which he declared that "between the collectivists of the
International and the Russian communists [meaning the
Bakouninists] there was all the diflference which exists
between civilization and barbarism, between liberty and
despotism, between citizens condemning every form of
violence and slaves addicted to the use of brutal
force." (19) Even this gives but a faint idea of the bit-
terness of the controversy. Marx, Engels, Liebknecht,
Hess, Outine, the General Council in London, and every
newspaper under the control of the Marxists began to
assail Bakounin and his circle. They no longer confined
themselves to a denunciation of the "utopian and bour-
geois" character of the anarchist philosophy. They went
into the past history of Bakounin, revived all the accu-
sations that had been made against him, and exposed
every particle of evidence obtainable concerning his
"checkered" career as a revolutionist. It will be remem-
bered that it was in 1869 that Nechayeff appeared in
Switzerland. When the Marxists got wind of him and
his doctrine, their rage knew no bounds. And later they
obtained and published in L'Alliance de la Democratie
Socialiste the material from which I have already quoted
extensively in my first chapter.

No useful purpose, however, would be served in deal-
ing with the personal phases of the struggle. Bakounin
became so irate at the attacks upon him, several of which
happened to have been written by Jews, that he wrote
an answer entitled "Study Upon the German Jews." He
feared to attack Marx ; and this "Study," while avoiding
a personal attack, sought to arouse a racial prejudice
that would injure him. He writes to Herzen, a month
after the congress at Basel, that he fully realizes that

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN 171

Marx is "the instigator and the leader of all this calum-
nious and infamous polemic." (20) He was reluctant,
however, to attack him personally, and even refers to
Marx and Lassalle as "these two Jewish giants," but
besides them, he adds, "there was and is a crowd of
Jewish pigmies." (21 ) "Nevertheless," he writes, "it may
happen, and very shortly, too, that I shall enter into con-
flict with him, not over any personal offense, of course,
but over a question of principle, regarding State com-
munism, of which he himself and the English and Ger-
man parties which he directs are the most ardent par-
tisans. Then it will be a fight to the finish. But there
is a time for everything, and the hour for this struggle
has not yet sounded. ... Do you not see that all
these gentlemen who are our enemies are forming a pha-
lanx, which must be disunited and broken up in order to
be the more easily routed ? You are more erudite than I ;
you know, therefore, better than I who was the first to
take for principle: Divide and rule. If at present I
should undertake an open war against Marx himself,
three-quarters of the members of the International would
turn against me, and I would be at a disadvantage, for I
would have lost the ground on which I must stand. But
by beginning this war with an attack against the rabble
by which he is surrounded, I shall have the majority on
my side. . , . But, . . . if he wishes to consti-
tute himself the defender of their cause, it is he who
would then declare war openly. In this case, I shall
take the field also and I shall play the star role." (22)

This was written in October, 1869, a month after the
Basel congress. On the ist of January, 1870, the Gen-
eral Council at London sent a private communication to
all sections of the International, and on the 28th of
March it was followed by another. These, together with

172 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

various circulars dealing with questions of principle, but
all consisting of attacks upon Bakounin personally or
upon his doctrines, finally goaded him into open war
upon Marx, the General Council, all their doctrines, and
even upon the then forming socialist party of Germany,
with Bebel and Liebknecht at its head. During the year
1870 Bakounin was preparing for the great controversy,
but his friends of Lyons interrupted his work by calling
him there to take part in the uprising of that year. He
hastened to Lyons, but, as we know, he was soon forced
to flee and conceal himself in Marseilles. It was there,
in the midst of the blackest despair, that Bakounin wrote :
"I have no longer any faith in the Revolution in France.
This nation is no longer in the least revolutionary. The
people themselves have become doctrinaire, as insolent
and as bourgeois as the bourgeois . . . The bour-
geois are loathsome. They are as savage as they are
stupid — and as the police blood flows in their veins — ^they
should be called policemen and attorneys-general in em-
bryo. I am going to reply to their infamous calumnies
by a good little book in which I shall give everything and
everybody its proper name. I leave this country with
deep despair in my heart." (23) He then set to work at
last to state systematically his own views and to anni-
hilate utterly those of the socialists. Many of these doc-
uments are only fragmentary. Some were started and
abandoned; others ended in hopeless confusion. With
the most extraordinary gift of inspirited statement, he
passes in review every phase of history, leaping from one
peak to another of the great periods, pointing his lessons,
issuing his warnings, but all the time throwing at the
reader such a Niagara of ideas and arguments that he is
left utterly dazed and bewildered as by some startling
military display or the rushing here and there of a mili-

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN 173

tary maneuver. In Lettres a un Frangais; Manuscrit de
114 Pages, ecrit a Marseille; Lettre a Esquiros; Pream-
bule pour la Seconde Livraison de I' Empire Knout 0-
Germanique; Avertissement pour I'Empire Knouto-Ger-
manique; Au Journal La Liberie, de Bruxelles; and
Fragment formant une Suite de I'Empire Knouto-Ger-
manique, he returns again and again to the charge, al-
ways seeking to deal some fatal blow to Marxian social-
ism, but never apparently satisfying himself that he has
a'ccomplished his task. He touches the border of prac-
tical criticism of the socialist program in the fragment
entitled Lettres a un Frangais. It ends, however, before
the task is done. Again he takes it up in the Manuscrit
ecrit a Marseille. But here also, as soon as he arrives
at the point of annihilating the socialists, his task is dis-
continued. In truth, he himself seems to have realized
the inconclusive character of his writings, as he refused
in some cases to complete them and in other cases to
publish them. Nevertheless, we find in various places of
his fragmentary writings not only a statement of his
own views, but his entire critique upon socialism.

As I have made clear enough, I think, in my first chap-
ter, there are in Bakounin's writings two main ideas put
forward again and again, dressed in innumerable forms
and supported by an inexhaustible variety of arguments.
These ideas are based upon his antagonism to religion
and to government. It was always Dieu et I'Etat that
he was fighting, and not until both the ideas and the insti-
tutions which had grown up in support of "these mon-
strous oppressions" had been destroyed and swept from
the earth could there arise, thought Bakounin, a free so-
ciety, peopled with happy and emancipated human souls.
When one has once obtained this conception of Bakou-
nin's fundamental views, there is little necessity for deal-

174 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

ing with the infinite number of minor points upon which
he was forced to attack the men and movements of his
time. On the one hand, he was assailing Mazzini, whose
every move in life was actuated by his intense re-
ligious and political faith, while, on the other hand, he
was attacking Marx as the modern Moses handing down
to the enslaved multitudes his table of infamous laws as
the foundation for a new tyranny, that of State social-
ism. In 1 87 1 Bakounin ceased all maneuvering. Bring-
ing out his great guns, he began to bombard both Maz-
zini and Marx. Never has polemic literature seen such
another battle. With a weapon in each hand, turning
from the one to the other of his antagonists, he battled,
as no man ever before battled, to crush "these enemies
of the entire human race."

There is, of course, no possibility of adequately sum-
marizing, in such limited space as I have allotted to it,
the thought of one who traversed the history of the en-
tire world of thought and action in pursuit of some
crushing argument against the socialism of Marx. This
perverted form of socialism, Bakounin. maintained, con-
templated the establishment of a communisme autoritaire,
or State socialism. "The State," he says, "having be-
come the sole owner — at the end of a certain period of
transition which will be necessary in order to transform
society, without too great economic and political shocks,
from the present organization of bourgeois privilege to
the future organization of official equality for all — the
State will also be the sole capitalist, the banker, the
money lender, the organizer, the director of all the na-
tional work, and the distributor of its products. Such
is the ideal, the fundameatal principle of modern com-
munism." (24) This is, of all Bakounin's criticisms of
socialism, the one that has had the greatest vitality. It

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN 175

has gone the round of the world as a crushing blow to
socialist ideals. The same thought has been repeated
by every politician, newspaper, and capitalist who has un-
dertaken to refute socialism. And every socialist will
admit that of all the attempts to misrepresent socialism
and to make it abhorrent to most people the idea ex-
pressed in these words of Bakounin has been the most
effective. To state thus the ideal of socialism is suffi-
cient in most cases to end all argument. Add to this
program military discipline for the masses, barracks for
homes, and a ruling bureaucracy, and you have complete
the terrifying picture that is held up to the workers of
every country, even to-day, as the nefarious, world-de- 1
stropng design of the socialists. V

It is, therefore, altogether proper to inquire if these
were in reality the aims of the Marxists. Many sincere
opponents of socialism actually believe that these are the
ends sought, while the casual reader of socialist litera-
ture may see much that appears to lead directly to the
dreadful State tyranny that Bakounin has pictured. But
did Marx actually advocate State socialism? In the
Communist Manifesto Marx proposed a series of re-
forms that the State alone was capable of instituting.
He urged that many of the instruments of production
should be centralized in the hands of the State. More-
over, nothing is clearer than his prophecy that the work-
ing class "will use its political supremacy to wrest, by
degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize
all instruments of production in the hands of the
State." (25) Indeed, in this program, as in all others
that have developed out of it, the end of socialism would
seem to be State ownership. "With trusts or without,"
writes Engels, "the official representative of capitalist
society — the State — ^will ultimately have to undertake the

176 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

direction of production." Commenting himself upon
this statement, he adds in a footnote: "I say 'have to.'
For only when the means of production and distribution
have actually outgrown the form of management by
joint-stock companies, and when, therefore, the taking
them over by the State has become economically inevita-
ble, only then — even if it is the State of to-day that ef-
fects this — is there an economic advance, the attainment
of another step preliminary to the taking over of all
productive forces by society itself." "This necessity,"
he continues, "for conversion into State property is felt
first in the great institutions for intercourse and com-
munication — ^the post-ofEce, the telegraphs, the rail-
ways." (26)

Here is the entire position in a nutshell. But Engels
says the State will "have to." Thus Engels and Marx
are not stating necessarily what they desire. And it
must not be forgotten that in all such statements both
were outlining only what appeared to them to be a natu-
ral and inevitable evolution. In State ownership they
saw an outcome of the necessary centralization of capital
and its growth into huge monopolies. Society would be
forced to use the power of the State to control, and
eventually to own, these menacing aggregations of cap-
ital in the hands of a few men. Both Marx and Engels
saw clearly enough that State monopoly does not destroy
the capitalistic nature of the productive forces. "The
modern State, no matter what its form, is essentially a
capitalist machine . . . The more it proceeds to the
taking over of productive forces, ... the more citi-
zens does it exploit. The workers remain wage work-
ers — proletarians. The capitalist relation is not done
away with. It is rather brought to a head. But, brought
to a head, it topples over. State ownership of the pro-

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN 177

diictive forces is not the solution of the conflict, but con-
cealed within it are the technical conditions that form the
elements of that solution." (27)

State ownership, then, was ript_considered h^ Marx
anJ Engels in itself a splution_ofjthe. problem. _li. is only
a ^ecessary pr eliminary to the solution. The essential
step, either sub sequent^ or precedent, is the capture oTpo-
I itical power by the working class. By this act the means
of production are freed "from the character of capital
they have thus far borne, ..." and their "socialized
character" is given "complete freedom to work itself
out." (28) "Socialized production upon a predeter-
mined plan becomes henceforth possible. The develop-
ment of production makes the existence of different
classes of society thenceforth an anachronism. In pro-
portion as anarchy in social production vanishes, the po-
litical authority of the State dies out. Man, at last the
master of his own form of social organization, becomes
at the same time the lord over Nature, his own master —
free.

"To accomplish this act of universal emancipation is
the histqncALmission^f jthe^modei^^ proletariat. To
tHoroughly compreh end the historical conditions and thus
the ve ry nature o FlEis act, to impart tcrthe new op-
pressedproktariagjcla^^ a fu[ll knowledge of the.jqgndi-
tibns and of the meaning of, the momentous act it is
called upon to. accomplish, this is..the task of_theJheoreti-
cal expressionjof^Jhe proletarian movement, scientific
socialTsiSi.^ (29)

Engels declares that the State, such as we have known
it in the past, will die out "as soon as there is no longer
any social class to be held in subjection; as soon as class
rule, and the individual struggle for existence based
upon our present anarchy in production, with the colli-

178 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

sions and excesses arising from these, are removed,
nothing more remains to be repressed, and a special re-
pressive force, a State, is no longer necessary. The
first act by virtue of which the State really constitutes
itself the representative of the whole of society — the tak-
ing possession of the means of production in the name
of society — ^this is, at the same time, its last independent
act as a State. State interference in social relations be-
comes, in one domain after another, superfluous, and
then dies out of itself ; the government of persons is re-
placed by the administration of things, and by the con-
duct of processes of production. The State is not 'abol-
ished.' It dies out. This gives the measure of the value
of the phrase 'a free State,' both as to its justifiable use
at times by agitators, and as to its ultimate scientific in-
sufficiency; and also of the demands of the so-called
anarchists for the abolition of the State out of
hand." (30)

This conception of the role of the State is one that no
anarchist can comprehend. He is unwilling to admit
that social evolution necessarily leads through State so-
cialism to industrial democracy, or even that such an
evolution is possible. To him the State seems to have a
corporeal, material existence of its own. It is a tyranni-
cal machine that exists above all classes and wields a
legal, military, and judicial power all its own. That the
State is only an agency for representing in certain fields
the power of a dominant economic class — this is some-
thing the anarchist will not admit. In fact, Bakounin
seems to have been utterly mystified when Eccarius an-
swered him at Basel in these words : "The State can be
reformed by the coming of the working class into
power." (31) That the State is but a committee for
managing the common affairs of the capitalist class can

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN 179

neither be granted nor understood by the anarchists.
Nor can it be comprehended that, when the capitalist
class has no affairs of its own to manage, the coercive
character of the State will gradually disappear. State
ownership undermines and destroys the economic power
of private capitalists. When the railroads, the mines,
the forests, and other great monopolies are taken out of
their hands, their control over the State is by this much
diminished. The only power they possess to control the
State resides in their economic power, and anything that
weakens that tends to destroy the class character of the
State itself. The inherent weakness of Bakounin's en-
tire philosophy lay in this fact, that it begins with the
necessity of abolishing God and the State, and that it can
never get beyond that or away from that. And, as a
necessary consequence, Bakounin had to oppose every
measure that looked toward any compromise with the
State, or that might enable the working class to exercise
any influence in or through the State.

When, therefore, the German party at its congress at
Eisenach demanded the suffrage and direct legislation,
when it declared that political liberty is the most urgent
preliminary condition for the economic emancipation of
the working class, Bakounin could see nothing revolu-
tionary in such a program. When, furthermore, the
party declared that the social question is inseparable
from the political question and that the problems of our
economic life could be solved only in a democratic State,
Bakounin, of course, was forced to oppose such here-
sies with all his power. And these were indeed the
really vital questions, upon which the anarchists and the
socialists could not be reconciled. It is in his Lettres
a un Frangais, written just after the failure of his own
"practical" efforts at Lyons, that Bakounin undertakes

l8o VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

his criticism of the program of the German social-
ists. Preparatory to this task, he first terrifies his
French readers with the warning that if the German
army, then at their doors, should conquer France, it
would result in the destruction of French socialism (by
which he means anarchism), in the utter degradation
and complete slavery of the French people, and make it
possible for the Knout of Germany and Russia to fall
upon the back of all Europe. "If, in this terrible mo-
ment, . . . [France] does not prefer the death of all
her children and the destruction of all her goods, the
burning of her villages, her cities, and of all her houses
to slavery under the yoke of the Prussians, if she does
not destroy, by means of a popular and revolutionary
uprising, the power of the innumerable German armies
which, victorious on all sides up to the present, threaten
her dignity, her liberty, and even her existence, if she
does not become a grave for all those six hundred thou-
sand soldiers of German despotism, if she does not op-
pose them with the one means capable of conquering and
destroying them under the present circumstances, if she
does not reply to this insolent invasion by the social revo-
lution no less ruthless and a thousand times more menac-
ing — it is certain, I maintain, that then France is lost,
her masses of working people will be slaves, and French
socialism will have lived its life." (32)

Approaching his subject in this dramatic manner,
Bakounin turns to examine the degenerate state of so-
cialism in Italy, Switzerland, and Germany to see "what
will be the chances of working-class emancipation in all
the rest of Europe." (33) In the first country socialism
is only in its infancy. The Italians are wholly ignorant
of the true causes of their misery. They are crushed,
maltreated, and dying of hunger. They are "led blindly

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN i8l

by the liberal and radical bourgeois." (34) Altogether,
there is no immediate hope of socialism there. In
Switzerland the people are asleep. "If the human world
were on the point of dying, the Swiss would not resusci-
tate it." (35) Only in Germany is socialism making
headway, and Bakounin undertakes to examine this so-
cialism and to put it forward as a horrible example. To
be sure, the German workers are awakening, but they
are under the leadership of certain cunning politicians,
who have abandoned all revolutionary ideas, and are now
undertaking to reform the State, hoping that that could
be done as a result of "a great peaceful and legal agita-
tion of the working class." (36) The very name Lieb-
knecht had taken for his paper, the Volksstaat, was in-
famous in Bakounin's eyes, while all the leaders of the
labor party had become merely appendages to "their
friends of the bourgeois Volkspartei." (37) He then
passes in review the program of the German socialists,
and points to their aim of establishing a democratic
State by the "direct and secret suffrage for all men" and
its guidance by direct legislation, as the utter abandon-
ment of every revolutionary idea. He dwells upon the
folly of the suffrage and of every effort to remodel, re-
cast, and change the State, as "purely political and bour-
geois." (38)

Democracies and republics are no less tyrannical than
monarchies. The suffrage cannot alter them. In Fin-
land, Switzerland, and America, he declares^ the masses
iiowTi'ave poIitical~power7 yeFTli^ remain in the deepest
d ^ths of misery. tTniversaT suSfage"Ts only a new su-
perstition7~while i0[ie"referendum," already existing" in
Switzerland, has failed utterly to improve the condition
ortFepeopTe. The working-class slaves, even in the most
democratic countries, "have neither the instruction, nor

l82 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

the leisure, nor the .independence nece ssary to exercise
fireely'aiig-'Witt i iaH-iniow l"edge" oj the case their right s"
as citizens." They have. In the most democratic countries,
wKicITare governed by representatives elected by all the
people, a ruling day or rather a day of Saturnalian cele-
bration: that is election day. Then the bourgeois, their
oppressors, their every-day exploiters, and their masters,
come to them, with hats off, talk to them of equality and
of fraternity, and call them the ruling people, of whom
they (the bourgeois) are only very humble servants, the
representatives of their will. This day over, fraternity
and equality evaporate in smoke, the bourgeois become
bourgeois once more, and the proletariat, the sovereign
people, remain slaves.

"Such is the real truth about the system of representa-
tive democracy, so much praised by the radical bour-
geois, even when it is amended, completed, and devel-
oped, with a popular intention, by the referendum or by
that 'direct legislation of the people' which is extolled by
a German school that wrongly calls itself socialist. For
very nearly two years, the referendum has been a part of
the constitution of the canton of Zurich, and up to this
time it has given absolutely no results. The people there
are called upon to vote, by yes or by no, on all the im-
portant laws which are presented to them by the repre-
sentative bodies. They could even grant them the in-
itiative without real liberty winning the least advan-
tage." (39)

"""TFis' a "discouraging picture that Bakounin draws here
of the ignorance and stupidity of the people as they are
led in every election to vote their enemies into power.
What, then, is to be done ? What shall these hordes of
the illiterate and miserable do? If by direct legislation
they cannot even vote laws in their own interest, how.

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN 183

then, will it be possible for them ever to improve their
condition? Such questions do not in the least disturb
Bakounin. He has one answer, Revolution ! As he said
in the beginning, so he repeats : "To escape its wretched
lot, the populace has three ways, two imaginary and one
real. The first two are the rum shop and the church,
. . . the third is the social revolution." (40) "A cure
is possible only through the social revolution," (41) that
is, through "the destruction of all institutions of inequal-
ity, and the establishment of economic and social equal-
ity." (42) _ _ .^,^,

However, if Bakounin's idea of the sooal revoltrttSii
never altered, the metljods by which it was to be carried
out suffered a change as a result of his experience in the
International. In 1871 he no longer advocated, openly
at any rate, secret conspiracies, the "loosening of evil
passions," or some vague "unchaining of the hydra." He
begins then to oppose to political action what he calls
economic action. (43) In the fragment — not published
during Bakounin's life — the Protestation de I' Alliance, he
covers for the hundredth time his arguments against the
Volksstaat, which is a "ridiculous contradiction, a fiction,
a lie." (44) "The State . . . will always be an in-
stitution of domination and of exploitation ... a
permanent source of slavery and of misery." (45) How ,
then, shall the State be destroyed ? Bakounin^_answer .
is "firstTby the organization~anJ"theTeaeraHon of strike
funds "^nd the International "soIIHarity of "strikes; sec-
ondly, by the"organization and "mternational federation of
traarUfiioiTr; andHastJyHT the spontaneous 'and direct
development of philosophical arid sociological ideas in the
International. ...

■"Let us now consider these three ways in their special
action, dittering one trom aTtnyrtlCTrH3iJtr-as-I--have~3-ust

184 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

said, inseparable, and let us commence with the organi -
zaHoiTof* strike funds and striJces.

"^Strlke funds have "foFtheir sole object to provide
the necessary money in order to make possible the costly
organization and maintenance of strikes. And the strike
is the beginning of the social war of the proletariat
against the bourgeoisie, while still within the limits of
legality.* Strikes are a valuable weapon in this two-
fold connection; first, because they electrify the masses,
give fresh impetus to their moral energy, and awaken
in their hearts the profound antagonism which exists be-
tween their interests and those of the bourgeoisie, by
showing them ever clearer the abyss which from this
time irrevocably separates them from that class; and,
second, because they contribute in large measure to
provoke and to constitute among the workers of all
trades, of all localities, and of all countries the con-
sciousness and the fact itself of solidarity: a double ac-
tion, the one negative and the other positive, which tends
to constitute directly the new world of the proletariat
by opposing it, almost absolutely, to the bourgeois
world." (46)

In another place he says: "Once this solidarity is
seriously accepted and firmly established, it brings forth
all the rest — all the principles — ^the most sublime and the
most subversive of the International, the most destruc-
tive of religion, of juridical right, and of the State, of
authority divine as well as human — in a word, the most
revolutionary from the socialist point of view, being
nothing but the natural and necessary developments of
this economic solidarity. And the immense practical ad-

* These are almost the exact words that Aristide Briand uses
in his argument for the general strike. See "La Grdve Gen-
erale," compiled by Lagardelle, p. 95.

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN 185

vantage of the trade sections over the central sections
consists precisely in this — that these developments and
these principles are demonstrated to the workers not by
theoretical reasoning, but by the living and tragic ex-
perience of a struggle which each day becomes larger,
more profound, and more terrible. In such a way that
the worker who is the least instructed, the least pre-
pared, the most gentle, always dragged further by the
very consequences of this conflict, ends by recognizing
himself to be a revolutionist, an anarchist, and an athe-
ist, without often knowing himself how he has become
such." (47)

This is as far as Bakounin gets in the statement of his
new program of action, as this article, like many others,
was discontinued and thrown aside at the moment when
he comes to clinching his argument. The mountain,
however, had labored, and this was its mouse. It is
chiefly remarkable as a forecast of the methods adopted
by the syndicalists a quarter of a century later. Never-
theless, one cannot escape the thought that Bakounin's
advocacy of a purely economic struggle was only a last
desperate effort on his part to discover some method of
action, aside from his now discredited riots and insur-
rections, that could serve as an effective substitute for
political action. In reality, Bakounin found himself in a
vicious circle. Again and again he tried to find his way
out, but invariably he returned to his starting point. In
despair he tore to pieces his manuscript, immediately,
however, to start a new one; then once more to rush
round the circle that ended nowhere.

Marx and Engels ignored utterly the many and varied
assaults that Bakounin made upon their theoretical views.
They were not the least concerned over his attacks upon
their socialism. They had not invented it, and economic

l86 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

evolution was determining its form. It was not, indeed,
until 1875 that Engels deals with the tendencies to State
socialism, and then it was in answer to Dr. Eugene
Duehring, privat docent at Berlin University, who had
just announced that he had become "converted" to social-
ism. Like many another distinguished convert, he imme-
diately began to remodel the whole theory and to create
what he supposed were new and original doctrines of his
own. But no sooner were they put in print than they
were found to be a restatement of the old and choicest
formulas of Proudhon and Bakounin. Engels there-
fore took up the cudgels once again, and, no doubt to the
stupefaction of Duehring, denied that property is rob-
bery, (48) that slaves are kept in slavery by force, (49)
and that the root of social and economic inequality is po-
litical tyranny. (50) Furthermore, he deplored this
method of interpreting history, and pointed out that cap-
italism would exist "if we exclude the possibility of force,
robbery, and cheating absolutely ..." Further-
more, "the monopolization of the means of production
. . . in the hands of a single class few in numbers
. . . rests on purely economic grounds without rob-
bery, force, or any intervention of politics or the gov-
ernment being necessary." To say that property rests on
force "merely serves to obscure the understanding of
the real development of things." (51) I mention Engels'
argument in answer to Dr. Duehring, because word for
word it answers also Bakounin. Of course, Bakounin
was a much more difficult antagonist, because he could
not be pinned down to any systematic doctrines or
to any clear and logical development or statement
of his thought. Indeed, Marx and Engels seemed more
amused than concerned and simply treated his essays as
a form of "hyper-revolutionary dress-parade oratory,"

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN 187

to use a phrase of Liebknecht's. They ridiculed him as
an "amorphous pan-destroyer," and made no attempt to
refute his really intangible social and economic theories.
However, they met Bakounin's attacks on the Inter-
national at every point. On the method of organization
which Bakounin advocated, namely, that of a federalism
of autonomous groups, which was to be "in the present
a faithful image of future society," Marx replied that
nothing could better suit the enemies of the International
than to see such anarchy reign amidst the workers. Fur-
thermore, when Bakounin advocated insurrections, up-
risings, and riots, or even indeed purely economic action
as a substitute for political action, Marx undertook ex-
traordinary measures to deal finally with Bakounin and
his program of action. A conference was therefore
called of the leading spirits of the International, to be
held in London in September, 1871. The whole of Ba-
kounin's activity was there discussed, and a series of
resolutions was adopted by the conference to be sent to
every section of the International movement. A number
if these resolutions dealt directly with Bakounin and the
Alliance, which it was thought still existed, despite Ba-
kounin's statement that it had been dissolved.* But by
far the most important work of the conference was a res-

* One of the resolutions prohibited the formation of sectarian
.jToups or separatist bodies within the International, such as
the Alliance de la Democratie Socialiste, that pretended "to
accomplish special missions, distinct from the common purposes
of the Association." Another resolution dealt with what was
called the "split" among the workers in the French-speaking
part of Switzerland. Still another resolution formally declared
that the International had nothing in common with the infamies
of Nechayeff, who had fraudulently usurped and exploited the
name of the International. Furthermore, Outine was instructed
to prepare a report from the Russian journals on the work of

l88 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

olution dealing with the question of political action. It
is perhaps as important a document as was issued during
the life of the International, and it stands as the answer
of Marx to what Bakounin called economic action and
to what the syndicalists now call direct action. The
whole International organization is here pleaded with to
maintain its faith in the efficacy of political means. Po-
litical action is pointed out as the fundamental principle
of the organization, and, in order to give authority to this
plea, the various declarations that had been made dur-
ing the life of the International were brought together.
Once again, the old motif of the Communist Manifesto
appeared, and every effort was made to give it the au-
thority of a positive law. Although rather long, the reso-
lution is too important a document not to be printed
here almost in full.

"Considering the following passage of the preamble
to the rules : 'The economic emancipation of the work-
ing classes is the great end to which every political move-
ment ought to be subordinate as a means;'

"That the Inaugural Address of the International
Working Men's Association (1864) states: 'The lords
of land and the lords of capital will always use their po-
litical privileges for the defense and perpetuation of their
economic monopolies. So far from promoting, they will
continue to lay every possible impediment in the way of
the emancipation of labor ... To conquer political
power has therefore become the great duty of the work-
ing classes ;'

"That the Congress of Lausanne (1867) has passed

Nechayeff. Cf. Resolutions II, XVII, XIII, XIV, respectively,
of the Conference of Delegates of the International Working
Men's Association, Assembled at London from 17th to 23d
September, 1871.

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN 189

this resolution: 'The social emancipation of the work-
men is inseparable from their political emancipation ;'

"That the declaration of the General Council relative
to the pretended plot of the French Internationals on the
eve of the plebiscite (1870) says: 'Certainly by the
tenor of our statutes, all our branches in England, on the
Continent, and in America have the special mission not
only to serve as centers for the militant organization of
the working class, but also to support, in their respec-
tive countries, every political movement tending toward
the accomplishment of our ultimate end — the economic
emancipation of the working class;'

"Considering that against this collective power of the
propertied classes the working class cannot act, as a
class, except by constituting itself into a political party,
distinct from, and opposed to, all old parties formed by
the propertied classes ;

"That this constitution of the working class into a
political party is indispensable in order to insure the
triumph of the social revolution and its ultimate end—
the abolition of classes ;

"That the combination of forces which the working
class has already effected by its economic struggles
ought at the same time to serve as a lever for its strug-
gles against the political power of landlords and cap-
italists.

"The Conference recalls to the members of the Inter-
national:

"That, in the militant state of the working class, its
economic movement and its political action are indissolu-
bly united." (52)

From the congress at Basel in 1869 to the conference
at The Hague in 1872, little was done by the Interna-

igo VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

tiohal to realize its great aim of organizing politically the
working class of Europe. It had been completely side-
tracked, and all the energies of its leading spirits were
wasted in controversy and in the various struggles of the
factions to control the organization. It was a period of
incessant warfare. Nearly every local conference was a
scene of dissension; many of the branches were dis-
solved ; and disruption in the Latin countries was gradu-
ally obliterating whatever there was of actual organiza-
tion. It all resolved itself into a question of domination
between Bakounin and Marx. The war between Ger-
many and France prevented an international gathering,
and it was not until September, 1872, that another con-
gress of the International was held. It was finally de-
cided that it should gather at The Hague. The Com-
mune had flashed across the sky for a moment. Insur-
rection had broken out and had been crushed in various
places in Europe. Strikes were more frequent than had
ever been known before. And, because of these various
disturbances, the International had become the terror of
Europe. Its strength and influence were vastly over-
estimated by the reactionary powers. Its hand was seen
in every act of the discontented masses. It became the
"Red Spectre," and all the powers of Europe were now
seeking to destroy it. Looming thus large to the outside
world, those within the International knew how baseless
were the fears of its opponents. They realized that in-
ternecine war was eating its heart out. During all this
time, when it was credited and blamed for every revolt
in Europe, there were incredible plotting and intrigue be-
tween the factions. Endless documents were printed,
assailing the alleged designs of this or that group, and
secret circulars were issued denouncing the character of
this or that leader. Sections were formed and dissolved

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN 191

in the maneuvers of the two factions to control the ap-
proaching congress. And, when finally the congress
gathered at The Hague, there was a gravity among the
delegates that foreboded what was to come. The Marx-
ists were in absolute control. On the resolution to ex-
pel Michael Bakounin from the International the vote
stood twenty-seven for and six against, while seven ab-
stained. The expulsion of Bakounin, however, occurred
only after a long debate upon his entire history and that
of his secret Alliance. Nearly all the amazing collection
of "documentary proof," afterward published in L' Alli-
ance de la Democratie Socialiste, was submitted to the
congress, and a resolution was passed that all the docu-
ments should be published, together with such others as
might tend to enlighten the membership concerning the
purposes of Bakounin's organization.

Two other important actions were taken at the con-
gress. One was to introduce into the actual rules of the
Association part of the resolution, which was passed by
the conference in London the year before, dealing with
political action, and this was adopted by thirty-six votes
against five. The other action was to remove the seat of
the General Council from London to New York. Al-
though this was suggested by Marx, it was energetically
fought on the ground that it meant the destruction of the
International. By a very narrow vote the resolution was
carried, twenty-six to twenty-three, a number of Marx's
oldest and most devoted followers voting against the
proposition. No really satisfactory explanation is given
for this extraordinary act, although it has been thought
since that Marx had arrived at the decision, perhaps the
hardest of his life, to destroy the International i'n order
to save it from the hands of the anarchists. To be sure,
Bakounin was now out of it, and there was little to be

192 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

feared from his faction, segregated and limited to cer-
tain places in the Latin countries; but everywhere the
name of the International was being used by all sorts of
elements that could only injure the actual labor move-
ment. The exploits of Nechayeff, of Bakounin, and of
certain Spanish and Italian sections had all conveyed
to the world an impression of the International which
perhaps could never be altogether erased. Furthermore,
in Germany and other countries the seeds of an actual
working-class political movement had been planted, and
there was already promise of a huge development in the
national organizations. What moved Marx thus to -de-
stroy his own child, the concrete thing he had dreamed
of in his thirty years of incessant labor, profound study,
and ceaseless agitation, will perhaps never be fully
known, but in any case no act of Marx was ever of
greater service to the cause of labor. It was a form of
surgery that cut out of the socialist movement forever
an irreconcilable element, and from then on the distinc-
tion between anarchist and socialist was indisputably
clear. They stood poles apart, and everyone realized
that no useful purpose would be served in trying to bring
them together again.

Largely because of Bakounin, the International_ as an
organization of Jabor never plaj^ed an important role ;
but, as a melting pot in which the crude ideas of many
philosophies were lli£awfc-rSom£tb"be Tule3r''of!i5rs to
be cast aside, and.aiLeyeAtually _to becIariEed and puri-
fied — the International performed a m&fnoraBTe service.
During its'eritire life it'was a battlefield. In th"e~l5egin-
ning there were many separate groups, but at the end
there were only two forces in combat — socialists and
anarchists. When the quarrel began there was among
the masses no sharply dividing line ; their ideas were in-

BATTLE BETWEEN MARX AND BAKOUNIN 193

coherent; and their allegiance was to individuals rather
than to principles. Without much discrimination, they
called themselves "communists," "Internationalists,"
"collectivists," "anarchists," "socialists." Even these
terms they had not defined, and it was only toward the
end of the International that the two combatants classi-
fied their principles into two antagonistic schools, so-
cialism and anarchism. Anarchism was no longer a
vague, undefined philosophy of human happiness ; it now
stood forth, clear and distinct from all other social the-
ories. After this no one need be in doubt as to its
meaning and methods. On the other hand, no thought-
ful person need longer remain in doubt as to the exact
meaning and methods of socialism. This work of defi-
nition and clarification was the immense service per-
formed by the International in its eight brief years of
life. Throughout Europe and America, after 1872, these
two forces openly declared that they had nothing in com-
mon, either in method or in philosophy. To them at least
the International had been a university.

CHAPTER IX

THE FIGHT FOR EXISTENCE

After The Hague congress the socialists and anar-
chists, divided into separate and antagonistic groups —
with principles as well as methods of organization that
were diametrically opposed to each other — were forced
to undergo a terrific struggle for existence. Marx had
clearly enough warned the followers of Bakounin that
their methods were suicidal. "The Alliance proceeds the
wrong way," he declared. "It proclaims anarchy in the
working-class ranks as the surest means of destroying
the powerful concentration of social and political forces
in the hands of the exploiters. On this pretext it asks
the International, at the moment when the old world is
striving to crush it, to replace its organization by anar-
chy." (i) And, as strange as it may seem, this was in
fact what Bakounin was actually striving for. In the
name of liberty he was demanding that the International
be broken up into thousands of isolated, autonomous
groups, which were to do whatever they pleased, in any
way they pleased, at any time they pleased. This may
have been, and doubtless was, in perfect harmony with
the philosophy of anarchism, but it had nothing in har-
mony with the idea of a solidified, international organi-
zation of workingmen that Marx was striving to bring
into existence. Anarchism when advocated as an ideal
for some distant social order of the future, concerned
Marx and Engels very little; indeed, they did not even

194

THE FIGHT FOR EXISTENCE 195

discuss it from this point of view. It was only when
Bakounin counseled anarchy as a method of working-
class organization that both Marx and Engels protested,
on the ground that such tactics could lead only to self-
destruction. Neither Bakounin nor his followers were
convinced, however, and they set out bravely after 1872
to put into practice their ideas. Their revolt against au-
thority was carried to its ultimate extreme. How far the
anarchists were prepared to go in their revolt is indi-
cated by a letter which Bakounin wrote to La Liberie of
Brussels a few days after his expulsion from the In-
ternational. Although not finished, and consequently not
sent to that journal, it is especially interesting because
he attacks the General CounciLas a new incarnation of
the State. Here his lively imagination pictures the In-
ternational as the germ of a new despotic social order,
already fallen under the domination of a group of dicta-
tors, and he exclaims: "A State, a government, a uni-
versal dictatorship! The dream of Gregory VII., of
Boniface VIII., of Charles V., and of Napoleon is re-
produced in new forms, but ever with the same preten-
sions, in the camp of social democracy." (2) This is an
altogether new point of view as to the character of the
State. We now learn that it means any form of cen-
tralized organization ; a committee, a chairman, an execu-
tive body of any sort is a State. The General Council
in London was a State. Marx and Engels were a State.
Any authority — no matter what its form, nor how con-
trolled, appointed, or elected — is a State.

I am not sure that this marks the birth of the re-
pugnance of the anarchists to even so innocent a form of
authority as that of a chairman. Nor am I certain that
this was the origin of those ideas of organization that
make of an anarchist meeting a modern Babel, wherein

ig6 VIOLENCE AND THE IjABOR MOVEMENT

all seems to be utter confusion. In any case, the Ba-
kouninists, after The Hague congress, undertook to re-
vive the International and to base this new organization
on these ideas of anarchism. After a conference at
Saint-Imier in the Jura, where Bakounin and his friends
outlined the policies of a new International, a call was
sent out for a congress to be held in Geneva in 1873.
The congress that assembled there was not a large one,
but, with no exaggeration whatever, it was one of the
most remarkable gatherings ever held. For six entire
days and nights the delegates struggled to create by some
magic means a world-wide organization of the people,
without a program, a committee, a chairman, or a vote.
No longer oppressed by the "tyranny" of Marx, or
baffled by his "abominable intrigues," they set out to
create their "faithful image" of the new world — an or-
ganization that was not to be an organization; a union
that was to be made up of fleeting and constantly shift-
ing elements, agreeing at one moment to unite, at the
next moment to divide. This was the insolvable problem
that now faced the first congress of the anarchists. There
were only two heretics among them. Both had come
from England; but Hales was a "voice crying in the
wilderness," while Eccarius sat silent throughout the
congress.

The first great debate took place upon whether there
should be any central council. The English .delegates
believed that there should be one, but that its power
should be limited. Other delegates believed that there
might be various commissions to perform certain neces-
sary executive services. John Hales declared, in support
of a central commission, that it will promote economy
and facilitate the work, and that it will be easy to pre-
vent such a commission from usurping power. (3) Paul

THE FIGHT FOR EXISTENCE 197

Brousse, Guillaume, and others opposed this view with
such heat, however, that Hales was forced to respond:
"I combat anarchy because the word and the thing that
it represents are the synonyms of dissolution. Anarchy
spells individualism, and individualism is the basis of
the existing society that we desire to destroy. . . .
Let us suppose, for example, a strike. Can one hope to
triumph with an anarchist organization? Under this
regime each one, being able to do what he pleases, can,
according to his will, work or not work. The general
interest will be sacrificed to individual caprice. The
veritable application of the anarchist principle would be
the dissolution of the International, and this congress has
precisely an opposite end, which is to reorganize the In-
ternational. One should not confound authority and
organization. We are not authoritarians, but we must be
organizers. Far from approving anarchy, which is the
present social state, we ought to combat it by the crea-
tion of a central commission and by the organization of
collectivism. Anarchy is the law of death; collectivism,
that of life." (4) This was, as Hales soon discovered,
the very essence of heresy, and, when the vote was taken,
he was overwhelmed by those opposed to any centralized
organization.

The anarchists were not, however, content merely with
having no central council, and they began to discuss
whether or not the various federations should vote upon
questions of principle. The commission that was deal-
ing with the revision of the by-laws recommended that
views should be harmonized by discussion and that any
decisions made by the congress should be enforced only
among those federations which accepted its decisions.
Costa of Italy approved of these ideas. "For that which
concerns theory, we can only discuss and seek to per-

198 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

suade each other, . . . but we cannot enforce, for
example, ... a certain political program." (5)
Brousse vigorously opposed the process of voting in any
form. It appeared to him that the true means of action
was to obtain the opinion of everyone. "The vote," he
declared, "simply divides an assembly into a majority
and a minority. . . . The only truly practical means
of obtaining a consensus of opinions is to have them
placed in the minutes without voting." (6) That view
seemed to prevail, and the amendment to this question
suggested by Hales of England was voted down by the
majority!

These two decisions of the congress will convey an
idea of the anarchist conception of organization. There
was to be no executive or administrative body. Nor were
the decisions of the congress to have any authority.
Anybody could join, believing anything he liked and do-
ing anything he liked. Only those federations which vol-
untarily accepted the decisions of the congress were ex-
pected to obey them. Matters of principle were in no-
wise to be voted upon, and each individual was allowed
to accept or reject them according to his wishes. The
actual rules, adopted unanimously, ran as follows:
"Federations and sections, composing the Association,
will conserve their complete autonomy, that is to say,
the right to organize themselves according to their will,
to administer their own affairs without any exterior
interference, and to determine themselves the path they
wish to follow in order to arrive at the emancipation of
labor." (7)

It was fully expected that, in addition to its work of
reorganization, if we may so speak of it, the congress
would definitely devise some method, other than a po-
litical one, for the emancipation of labor. The general

THE FIGHT FOR EXISTENCE 199

strike had been put down upon the agenda for discus-
sion. In the report of the Jura section it was declared :
"If the workers affiliated with the Association could fix
a certain day for the general strike, not only to obtain a
reduction of hours and a diminution * of wages, but also
to find the means of living in the cooperative workshops,
by groups and by colonies, we could not decline to lend
them our assistance, and we would make appeal to the
members of all nations to lend them both moral and
material aid." (8) Unfortunately, the congress had lit-
tle time to discuss this part of its program. In the"
Compte-Rendu OMciel there is no report of whatever
discussion took place. But Guillaume, in his Documents
et Souvenirs, gives us a brief account of what occurred.
After two resolutions had been put on the subject they
were withdrawn because of opposition, and finally Guil-
laume introduced the following:

"Whereas partial strikes can only^^grocure ^for the
work ers momentary and illusory rrelief, .and-whereaSj^by
l;heir very nature, wages will always J3e_ limited, to the
strictlj^ necessary" meaiis' of subsistence in order to keep
the worker from dying of hunger,

" The Congress^ ^^ithout believTtig in the possibilitj[__of
completely ren ouncing partial strikes, recommends the
workers to devote their efforts to ach ieving an interna-
tional organization of trade bodies, which will enable
them to undertake some day "a general striker" the only
realfy 'efficacibui" strike to reaIize_the_complete_^nanci^
pation of_jabor." (9) All the delegates approved the
resolution, excepting Hales, who voted against it, and
Van den Abeele, who abstained from voting because the
matter would be later discussed in Holland.

* Probably intended for "increase of wages," but this is as it
reads in the official report.

200 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

It was of course inevitable that such an "organization"
should soon disappear. Vigorous efforts were made by
a few of the devoted to keep the movement alive, but
it is easy to see that an aggregation so loosely united, and
without any really definite purpose, was destined to dis-
solution. During the next few years various small con-
gresses were held, but they were merely beating a corpse
in the effort to keep it alive. And, while the Bakounin-
ists were engaged in this critical struggle with death, the
spirit that had animated all their battles with Marx with-
drew himself. Bakounin was tired and discouraged, and
he left his friends of the Jura without advice or assist-
ance in their now impossible task. Thus precipitately
ended the efforts of the anarchists to build up a new In-
ternational. George Plechanoff illuminates the insolvable
problem of the anarchists with his powerful statement:
"Error has its logic as well as truth. Once you reject
the political action of the working class, you are fatally
driven — provided you do not wish to serve the bour-
geois politicians — ^to accept the tactics of the Vaillants
and the Henrys." ( lo) That this is terribly true is open
to no question whatever. And the anarchists now found
themselves in a veritable cul-de-sac. Like the poor in
Sidney Lanier's poem, they were pressing

"Against an inward-opening door
That pressure tightens evermore."

The more they fretted and stormed and crushed each
other, the more hopelessly impossible became the chance
of egress. The more desperately they threw themselves
against that door, the more securely they imprisoned
themselves. It was the very logic of their tactics that
they could not circumvent so small an obstacle as that
inward-opening door. It meant self-destruction. And

THE FIQHT FOR EXISTENCE 201

that, of course, was exactly what happened, as we know,
to those who followed the vicious round of logic from
which Bakounin could not extricate himself. Their
struggle for an organized existence was brief, and at the
end of the seventies it was entirely over.

Naturally, the complete failure of all their projects did
not improve their temper, and they lost no opportunity
to assail the Marxists. The Jura Bulletin of December
10, 1876, translated an article entitled Poco a Poco, writ-
ten by Andrea Costa, who labeled the "pacific" socialists
"apostles of conciliation and ambiguity." They wish,
said Costa, to march slowly on the road of progress.
"Otherwise, indeed, what would become of them and
their newspapers? For them the field of fruitful study
and of profound observations on the phenomena of in-
dustrial life would be closed. For the journalists the
means of earning money would have likewise disappeared.
. . . Finding the satisfaction of their own aspirations
in the present state of misery, they end by becoming,
often without wishing it, profoundly egotistic and bad
. . . While calling themselves socialists, they are
more dangerous than the declared enemies of the popu-
lar cause." (11) About this time a new journal ap-
peared at Florence under the name of I'Anarchia and
announced the following program: "We are not arm-
chair (Katheder) socialists. We will speak a simple
language in order that the proletariat may understand
once for all what road it must follow in order to arrive
at its complete emancipation. L'AnarcMa will fight with-
out truce not only the exploiting bourgeoisie, but also
the new charlatans of socialism, for the latter are the
most dangerous enemies of the working class." (12)

The following year Kropotkin wrote two articles in
the Bulletin, July 22 and 29, which vigorously attacked

202 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

socialist parliamentary tactics. "At what price does one
succeed in leading the people to the ballot boxes?" he
asks in the first article. "Have the frankness to ac-
knowledge, gentlemen politicians, that it is by inculcating
this illusion, that in sending members to parliament the
people will succeed in freeing themselves and in better-
ing their lot, that is to say, by telling them what one
knows to be an absolute lie. It is certainly not for the
pleasure of getting their education that the German peo-
ple give their pennies for parliamentary agitation. It is
because, from hearing it repeated each day by hundreds
of 'agitators,' they come to believe that truly by this
method they will be able to realize, in part at least, if not
completely, their hopes. Acknowledge it for once, poli-
ticians of to-day, formerly socialists, that we may say
aloud what you think in silence : 'You are liars !' Yes,
liars, I insist upon the word, since you lie to the people
when you tell them that they will better their lot by
sending you to parliament. You lie, for you yourselves,
but a few years since, have maintained absolutely the
contrary." (13)

What infuriated the anarchists was the amazing
growth of the socialist political parties. It was only
after The Hague congress that the socialist movement
was in reality free to begin its actual work. With ideas
diametrically opposed to those of the anarchists, the so-
cialists set out to build up their national movements by
uniting the various elements in the labor world. There
were now devoted disciples of Marx in every country of
Europe, and in the next few years, in France, Belgium,
Holland, Norway, Sweden, and Germany, the founda-
tions were laid for the great national movements that
exist to-day. In France, Jules Guesde, Paul Lafargue,
and Gabriel Deville launched a socialist labor party in

THE FIGHT FOR EXISTENCE 203

1878. A Danish socialist labor party was formed the
same year by an agreement with the trade unions. In
the early eighties the Social-Democratic Federation was
founded in England, and in 1881 a congress of various
groups of radicals, socialists, and republicans launched
a political movement in Italy. In Germany the socialists
had already built up a great political organization. This
had been done directly under the guidance of Marx and
Engels through Liebknecht and Bebel. Marx's ideas
were there perfectly worked out, and nothing so much
as that living, growing thing incensed the anarchists.
Indeed, they seemed to be convinced that there was more
of menace to the working class in these growing organi-
zations of the socialists 'than in the power of the bour-
geoisie itself.

The controversial literature of this period is not pleas-
ant reading. The socialists and anarchists were literally
at each other's throats, and the spirit of malignity that
actuated many of their assaults upon each other is re-
volting to those of to-day who cannot appreciate the in-
tensity of this battle for the preservation of their most
cherished ideas. And in all this period the socialist and
labor movement was overrun with agents provocateurs,
and every variety of paid police agents sent to disrupt
and destroy these organizations. And, as has always
been the case, these "reptiles," as they were called, were
advocating among the masses those deeds which the chief
anar chists were proclaiming as revolutionary methods.
Riots, insurre ctions, dy namite ou t ragesTlKe sfiobting o f
indi viduals, and all f orms of violence were being
prea ched to the po o r and hun gr y men v/ho made up th e
mass of the la bor movernen t. Under the guise of_anar-
chists, these ^^reptiles" w eES-^^^"-^""^^' upnn- flsJierDic
figures, and everywhere, even when they did not sue-

204 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

ceed in winning thg. c onfidence of t he masses, they were
^bleToTawaken suspicion and distrust that demoralized
the movement - "The~sofciai"ists were assailed as traitors
to the cause of labor, because they were preaching peace-
able methods. They were accused of alliances with other
parties, because they sought to elect men to parliament.
They were denounced as in league with the Government
and even the police, because they disapproved of dyna-
mite.

On the other hand, the socialists were equally bitter
in their attacks upon the anarchists. They denounced
their methods as suicidal and the Propaganda of the
Deed as utter madness. In La Periode Tragique, when
Duval, Decamps, Ravachol, and the other anarchists in
France were committing the most astounding crimes,
Jules Guesde and other socialist leaders condemned these
outrages and protested against being associated in the
public mind with those who advocated theft and murder
as a method of propaganda. Indeed, the anarchists in
the late seventies and in the eighties lost many who had
been formerly friendly to them. Guesde and Plecha-
noff, both of whom had been influenced in their early days
by the Bakouninists, had broken with them completely.
Later Paul Brousse and Andrea Costa left them. And,
in fact, the anarchists were now incapable of any effec-
tive action or even education. Without committees, ex-
ecutives, laws, votes, or chairmen, they could not under-
take any work which depended on organized effort, and,
except as they managed from time to time to gain a
prominent position in some labor or radical organization
built up by others, they had no influence over any large
body of people. They were fighting desperately to pre-
vent extinction, and in their struggle a number of ex-
traordinarily brilliant and daring characters came to the

THE FIGHT FOR EXISTENCE 205

front. But during the next decade their tragic despera-
tion, instead of advancing anarchism, served only to
strengthen the reactionary elements of Europe in their
effort to annihilate the now formidable labor and social-
ist movements.

Turning now to the struggle for existence of the so-
cialist parties of the various countries, there is one story
that is far too important in the history of socialism to
be passed over. It was a magnificent battle against the
terrorists above and the terrorists below, that ended in
complete victory for the socialists. Strangely enough,
the greatest provocation to violence that has ever con-
fronted the labor movement and the greatest opportunity
that was ever offered to anarchy occurred in precisely
that country where it was least expected. Nowhere else
in all Europe had socialism made such advances as in
Germany; and nowhere else was the movement so well
organized, so intelligently led, or so clear as to its aims
and methods. An immense agitation had gone on dur-
ing the entire sixties, and working-class organizations
were springing up everywhere. Besides possessing the
greatest theorists of socialism, Marx and Engels, the
German movement was rich indeed in having in its serv-
ice three such matchless agitators as Lassalle, Bebel, and
Liebknecht. Lassalle certainly had no peer, and those
who have written of him exhaust superlatives in their
efforts to describe this prodigy. He, also, was a product
of that hero-producing period of '48. He had been ar-
rested in Diisseldorf at the same time that Marx and his
circle had been arrested at Cologne. He was then only
twenty-three years of age. Yet his defense of his actions
in court is said to have been a masterpiece. Even the
critic George Brandes has spoken of it as the most won-

2o6 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

derful example of manly courage and eloquence in a
youth that the history of the world has given us.

Precocious as a child, proud and haughty as a youth,
gifted with a critical, penetrating, and brilliant mind,
and moved by an ambition that knew no bounds, Las-
salle, with all his powerful passion and dramatic talents,
could not have been other than a great figure. When a
man possesses qualities that call forth the wonder of
Heine, Humboldt, Bismarck, and Brandes, when Bakou-
nin calls him a "giant," and even George Meredith turns
to him as a personality almost unequaled in fiction and
makes a novel out of his career, the plain ordinary world
may gain some conception of this "father of the German
labor movement." This is no place to deal with certain
deplorable and contradictory phases of his life nor even
with some of his mad dreams that led Bismarck, after
saying that "he was one of the most intellectual and
gifted men with whom I have ever had intercourse,
. . . " to add "and it was perhaps a matter of doubt
to him whether the German Empire wpuld close with
the Hohenzollern dynasty or the Lassalle dynasty." (14)
Such was the proud, unruly, ambitious spirit of the man,
who, in 1862, came actively to voice the claims of labor.

Setting out to regenerate society and appealing directly
to the working classes, Lassalle lashed them with scorn.
"You German workingmen are curious people," he said.
"French and English workingmen have to be shown
how their miserable condition may be improved ; but you
have first to be shown that you are in a miserable con-
dition. So long as you have a piece of bad sausage and
a glass of beer, you do not notice that you want any-
thing. That is a result of your accursed absence of
needs. What, you will say, is this, then, a virtue ? Yes,
in the eyes of the Christian preacher of morality it is cer-

THE FIGHT FOR EXISTENCE 207

taiilly a virtue. Absence of needs is the virtue of the In-
dian pillar saint and of the Christian monk, but in the
eyes of the student of history and the political econ-
omist it is quite a different matter. Ask all political
economists what is the greatest misfortune for a nation?
The absence of wants. For these are the spurs of its
development and of civilization. The Neapolitan la-
zaroni are so far behind in civilization, because they have
no wants, because they stretch themselves out content-
edly and warm themselves in the sun when they have
secured a handful of macaroni. Why is the Russian
Cossack so backward in civilization? Because he eats
tallow candles and is hdppy when he can fuddle him-
self on bad liquor. To have as many needs as possible,
but to satisfy them in an honorable and respectable way,
that is the virtue of the present, of the economic age!
And, so long as you do not understand and follow that
truth, I shall preach in vain." (15) Other nations may
be slaves, he added, recalling the words of Ludwig Borne ;
they may be put in chains and be held down by force,
but the Germans are flunkies — it is not necessary to lay
chains on them — they may be allowed to wander free
about the house. Yet, while thus shaming the working
classes, he pleaded their cause as no other one has
pleaded it, and, after humiliating them, he held them
spellbound, as he traced the great role the working classes
were destined to play in the regeneration of all society.
The socialism of Lassalle had much in common with
that of Louis Blanc, and his theory of cooperative enter-
prises subsidized by the State was almost identical.
Chiefly toward this end he sought to promote working-
class organization, although he also believed that the
working classes would eventually gain control of the en-
tire State and, through it, reorganize production. He

2o8 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

agitated for universal suffrage and even plotted with
Bismarck to obtain it. He was confident that an indus-
trial revolution was inevitable. The change "will either
come in complete legality," he said, "and with all the
blessings of peace — if people are only wise enough to
resolve that it shall be introduced in time and from
above — or it will one day break in amid all the convul-
sions of violence, with wild, flowing hair, and iron san-
dals upon its feet. In one way or the other it will come
at all events, and when, shutting myself from the noise
of the day, I lose myself in history — then I hear its
tread. But do you not see, then, that, in spite of this
difference in what we believe, our endeavors go hand in
hand? You do not believe in revolution, and therefore
you want to prevent it. Good, do that which is your
duty. But I do believe in revolution, and, because I be-
lieve in it, I wish, not to precipitate it — for I have al-
ready told you that according to my view of history the
efforts of a tribune are in this respect necessarily as im-
potent as the breath of my mouth would be to unfetter
the storm upon the sea — but in case it should come, and
from below, I will humanize it, civilize it before-
hand." (i6) Thus Lassalle saw that "to wish to make a
revolution is the foolishness of immature men who have
no knowledge of the laws of history." (17) Yet he
stated also that, if a revolution is imminent, it is equally
childish for the powerful to' think they can stem it.
"Revolution is an overturning, and a revolution always
takes place — whether it be with or without force is a
matter of no importance . . . when an entirely new
principle is introduced in the place of the existing order.
Reform, on the other hand, takes place when the princi-
ple of the existing order is retained, but is developed to
more liberal or more consequent and just conclusions.

THE FIGHT FOR EXISTENCE 209

Here, again, the question of means is of no importance.
A reform may be effected by insurrection and bloodshed,
and a revolution may take place in the deepest
peace." (18)

Through the agitation of Lassalle, the Universal Ger-
man Working Men's Association was organized, and it
was his work for that body that won him fame as the
founder of the German labor movement. Not a laborer
himself, nor indeed speaking to them as one of them-
selves, he led a life that would probably have ended dis-
astrously, even to the cause itself, had it not been for his
dramatic ending through the love affair and the duel.
Fate was kind to Lassalle in that he lived only so long
as his influence served the cause of the workers, and in
that death took him before life shattered another idol
of the masses. "One of two things," said Lassalle once
before his judges. "Either let us drink Cyprian wine
and kiss beautiful maidens — in other words, indulge in
the most common selfishness of pleasure — or, if we are
to speak of the State and morality, let us dedicate all our
powers to the improvement of the dark lot of the vast
majority of mankind, out of whose night-covered floods
we, the propertied class, only rise like solitary pillars, as
if to show how dark are those floods, how deep is their
abyss." (19) With such marvelous pictures as this Las-
salle created a revolution in the thought and even in the
action of the working classes of Germany. At times he
drank Cyprian wines, and what might have happened
had he lived no one can tell. But he was indeed at the
time a "solitary pillar," rising out of "night-covered
floods," a heroic figure, who is even to-day an unforgetta-
ble memory.

Bebel and Liebknecht appeared in the German move-
ment as influential figures only after the disappearance

210 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

of Lassalle. And, while the labor movement was already
launched, it was in a deplorable condition when these two
began their great work of uniting the toilers and organiz-
ing a political party. One of the first difficult tasks
placed before them was to root out of the labor move-
ment the corruption which Bismarck had introduced into
it. That great and rising statesman was a practical poli-
tician not excelled even in America. In the most cold-
blooded manner he sought to buy men and movements.
For variqus reasons of his own he wanted the support
of the working-class; and, as early as 1864, he em-
ployed Lothar Bucher, an old revolutionist who had been
intimately associated with Marx. Possessed of remark-
able intellectual gifts and an easy conscience, Bucher
was of invaluable service to Bismarck, both in his knowl-
edge of the inside workings of the labor and socialist
movement and as a go-between when the Iron Chancel-
lor had any dealings with the socialists. Through Bucher,
Bismarck tried to bribe even Marx, and offered him a
position on the Government official newspaper, the
Staats Anzeiger. Bucher was also an intimate friend of
Lassalle's, and it was doubtless through him that Bis-
marck arranged his secret conferences with Lassalle.
The latter left no account of their relations, and it is
difficult now to know how intimate they were or who
first sought to establish them. About all that is known
is what Bismarck himself said in the Reichstag when
Bebel forced him to admit that he had conferred fre-
quently with Lassalle : "Lassalle himself wanted urgently
to enter into negotiations with me." (20) It is known
that Lassalle sent to the Chancellor numerous communi-
cations, and that one of his letters to the secretary of the
Universal Association reads, "The things sent to Bis-
marck should go in an envelope" marked "Per-

THE FIGHT FOR EXISTENCE 211

sonal." (21) Liebknecht later exposed August Brass
as in the employ of Bismarck, although he was a "red
republican," who had started a journal and had obtained
Liebknecht's cooperation. Furthermore, when he was
tried for high treason in 1872, Liebknecht declared that
Bismarck's agents had tried to buy him. "Bismarck takes
not only money, but also men, where he finds them. It
does not matter to what party a man belongs. That is
immaterial to him. He even prefers renegades, for a
renegade is a man without honor and, consequently, an
instrument without will power — as if dead — in the hands
of the master." (22) "I do not need to say . . .
that I repelled Bismarck's offers of corruption with the
scorn which they merited," Liebknecht continues. "If I
had not done so, if I had been infamous enough to sacri-
fice my principles to my personal interest, I would be in
a brilliant position, instead of on the bench of the ac-
cused where I have been sent by those who, years ago,
tried in vain to buy me." (23) As early as 1865 Marx
and Engels had to withdraw from their collaboration
with Von Schweitzer in his journal, the Sozialdemokrat,
because it was suspected that he had sold out to Bis-
marck. This was followed by Bebel's and Liebknecht's
war on Von Schweitzer because of his relations to Bis-
marck. Von Schweitzer, as the successor of Lassalle at
the head of the Universal Working Men's Association,
occupied a powerful position, and the quarrels between
the various elements in the labor movement were at this
time almost fatal to the cause. However, various repre-
sentatives of the working class already sat in Parliament,
and among them were Bebel and Liebknecht.

The exposures of Liebknecht and Bebel proved not
only ruinous to Von Schweitzer, but excessively annoying
to Bismarck, and as early as 1871 he wanted to begin a

212 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

war upon the Marxian socialists. In 1874 he actually
began his attempts to crush what he could no longer cor-
rupt or control. He became more and more enraged at
the attitude of the socialists toward him personally.
Moreover, they were no longer advocating cooperative
associations subsidized by the State; they were now
propagating everywhere republican and socialist ideas.
He tried in various ways to rid the country of the two
chief malcontents, Bebel and Liebknecht, but even their
arrests seemed only to add to their fame and to spread
more throughout the masses their revolutionary views.
He says himself that he was awakened to the iniquity of
their doctrines when they defended the republican prin-
ciples of the Paris workmen in 187 1. At his trial in
1872 Liebknecht stated with perfect frankness his re-
publican principles. "Gentlemen Judges and Jurors, I
do not disown my past, my principles, and my convic-
tions. I deny nothing ; I conceal nothing. And, in order
to show that I am an adversary of monarchy and of
present society, and that when duty calls me I do not
recoil before the struggle, there was truly no need of the
foolish inventions of the policemen of Giessen. I say
here freely and openly: Since I have been capable of
thinking I have been a republican, and I shall die a re-
publican. (24) . . . If I have had to undergo un-
heard of persecutions and if I am poor, that is nothing
to be ashamed of — no, I am proud of it, for that is the
most eloquent witness of my political integrity. Yet,
once more, I am not a conspirator by profession. Call
me, if you will, a soldier of the Revolution — I do not
object to that.

"From my youth a double ideal has soared above me :
Germany free and united and the emancipation of the
working people, that is to say, the suppression of class

THE FIGHT FOR EXISTENCE 213

domination, which is synonymous with the liberation of
humanity. For this double end I have struggled with
all my strength, and for this double end I will struggle
as long as a breath of life remains in me. Duty wills
it!" (25)

Such doctrines must of course be suppressed, and the
exposure o.f those who had relations with Bismarck
made it impossible for him longer to deal even with a
section of the labor movement. The result was that
persecutions were begun on both the Lassalleans and the
Marxists. And it was largely this new policy of repres-
sion that forced the warring labor groups in 1875 to
meet in conference at Gotha and to unite in one organi-
zation. In the following election, 1877, the united party
polled nearly five hundred thousand votes, or about ten
per cent, of all the votes cast in Germany. It now had
twelve members in the Reichstag, and Bismarck saw very
clearly that a force was rising in Germany that threat-
ened not only him but his beloved Hohenzollern dynasty
itself.

For years most of its opponents comforted themselves
with the belief that socialism was merely a temporary
disturbance which, if left alone, would run its course
and eventually die out. Again and again its militant
enemies had discussed undertaking measures against it,
but the wiser heads prevailed until 1877, when the so-
cialists polled a great vote. And, of course, when it was
once decided that socialism must be stamped out, a really
good pretext was soon found upon which repressive
measures might be taken. I have already mentioned
that on May 11, 1878, Emperor William was shot at by
Hodel. It was, of course, natural that the reactionaries
should make the most possible of this act of the would-be
assassin, and, when photographs of several prominent so-

214

VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

cialists were found on his person, a great clamor arose
for a coercive law to destroy the social democrats. The
question was immediately discussed in the Reichstag, but
the moderate forces prevailed, and the bill was rejected.
Hardly, however, had the discussion ended before a sec-
ond attempt was made on the life of the aged sovereign.
This time it was Dr. Karl NobiUng who, on June 2, 1878,
fired at the Emperor from an upper window in the main
street of Berlin. In this case, the Emperor was se-
verely wounded, and, in the panic that ensued, even the
moderate elements agreed that social democracy must be
suppressed. Various suggestions were made. Some pro-
posed the blacklisting of all workmen who avowed social-
ist principles, while others suggested that all socialists
should be expelled from the country. To exile half a
million voters was, however, a rather large undertaking,
and, in any case, Bismarck had his own plans. First he
precipitated a general election, giving the socialists no
time to prepare their campaign. As a result, their mem-
bers in the Reichstag were diminished in number, and
their vote throughout the country decreased by over fifty
thousand. When the Reichstag again assembled, Bis-
marck laid before it his bill against "the publicly dan-
gerous endeavors of social-democracy." The statement
accompanying the bill sought to justify its repressive
measures by citing in the preamble the two attempts
made upon the Emperor, and by stating the conviction
of the Federal Government that extraordinary measures
must be taken. A battle royal occurred in the Reich-
stag between Bismarck on the one side and Bebel and
Liebknecht on the other. Nevertheless, the bill became
a law in October of that year.

The anti-socialist law was intended to cut off every
legal and peaceable means of advancing the socialist

THE FIGHT FOR EXISTENCE 215

cause. It was determined that the German social demo-
crats must be put mentally, morally, and physically upon
the rack. Even the briefest summary of the provisions
of the anti-socialist law will illustrate how determined the
reactionaries were to annihilate utterly the socialist move-
ment. The chief measures were as follows:

/. Prohibitory

1. The formation or existence of organizations
which sought by social-democratic, socialistic, or
communistic movements to subvert the present State
and social order was prohibited. The prohibition
was also extended to organizations exhibiting tend-
encies which threatened to endanger the public peace
and amity between classes.

2. The right of assembly was greatly restricted.
All meetings in which social-democratic, socialistic,
or communistic tendencies came to light were to be
dissolved. Public festivities and processions were
regarded as meetings.

3. Social-democratic, socialistic, and communistic
publications of all kinds were to be interdicted, the
local police dealing with home publications and the
Chancellor with foreign ones.

4. Stocks of prohibited works were to be con-
fiscated, and the type, stones, or other apparatus used
for printing might be likewise seized, and, on the
interdict being confirmed, be made unusable.

5. The collection of money in behalf of social-
democratic, socialistic, or communistic movements
was forbidden, as were public appeals for help.

//. Penal

I. Any person associating himself as member or
otherwise with a prohibited organization was liable

2i6 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

to a fine of 500 marks or three months' imprison-
ment, and a similar penalty was incurred by anyone
who gave a prohibited association or meeting a place
of assembly.

2. The circulation or printing of a prohibited pub-
lication entailed a fine not exceeding one thousand
marks or imprisonment up to six months.

3. Convicted agitators might be expelled from a
certain locality or from a governmental district, and
foreigners be expelled from federal territory.

4. Innkeepers, printers, booksellers, and owners
of lending libraries and reading rooms who circu-
lated interdicted publications might, besides being
imprisoned, be deprived of their vocations.

5. Persons who were known to be active social-
ists, or who had been convicted under this law, might
be refused permission publicly to circulate or sell
publications, and any violation of the provision
against the circulation of socialistic literature in
inns, shops, libraries, and newsrooms was punish-
able with a fine of one thousan,d marks or imprison-
ment for six months.

///. Power conferred upon authorities.

1. Meetings may only take place with the previ-
ous sanction of the police, but this restriction does
not extend to meetings held in connection with elec-
tions to the Reichstag or the Diets.

2. The circulation of publications may not take
place without permission in public roads, streets,
squares, or other public places.

3. Persons from whom danger to the public se-
curity or order is apprehended may be refused resi-
dence in a locality or governmental district.

THE FIGHT FOR EXISTENCE 217

4. The possession, carrying, introduction, and
sale of weapons within the area affected are forbid-
den, restricted, or made dependent on certain con-
ditions. All ordinances issued on the strength of
this section were to be notified at once to the Reich-
stag and to be published in the official Gazette. (26)

When this law went into effect, the outlook for the la-
bor movement seemed utterly bla ck and hopeless. Every
path seemed closed to it except that of violence. Imme-
diately many pla ces in Germany were'put iihdeFl nartia t
law. S ocieties we re' dissolved, newspapers suppressed,
pr inting esta blishments confiscated, and in ^a short time
fifty agitators hadf been expel led f rom Ber lin alone. A
reign of official tyranny and police persecution was estab-
lished, and even the employers undertook to impoverish
and to blacklist men who were thought to hold socialist
views. Within a few w eeks ever y society, periodi cal,
and agitator disappeared, and not a. thing^ seemed left of
the great movement of half a million m en that had ex-
iste d a few weeks before. There have been many simi-
lar situations that have faced the socialist and labor
movements of other countries. England and France had*;
undergone similar trials. Even to-da y in America we
fin d, at certain times and in certain places, a situation
altogether similar. In Colorado during the recent labo r
wars a nd in West Virginia during t h e early months o f
IQ 13 every tyran ny that existed i n Germany in 1 879
was repeated here. Infe sted with spies seeking to e n-
courage violence, brutally maltreated by the officials of
order, their property confisc ated by"the m ilitary, masses
tfirow n int o prison and other masses exileq, even "th e
Hprht nf asspmhlafrp and nf free spech denied them—
these are thp fvarfly cim^igr nnnriitiQns which have ex-

2i8 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

isted in all countries when efforts have been made to
crush the labor movement.

And in all countries where such conditions exist cer-
tain minds immediately clamor for what is called "ac-
tion." They want to answer violence with violence ; they
want to respond to the terrorism of the Government with
a terrorism of their own. And in Germany at this time
there were a number who argued that, as they were in
fact outlaws, why should they not adopt the tactics of
outlaws? Should men peaceably and quietly submit to
every insult and every form of tyranny — ^to be thrown
in jail for speaking the dictates of their conscience and
even to be hung for preaching to their comrades the
necessity of a nobler and better social order? If Bis-
marck and his police forces have the power to outlaw us,
have we not the right to exercise the tactics of outlaws?
"All measures," cried Most from London, "are legiti-
mate against tyrants;" (27) while Hasselmann, his
friend, advised an immediate insurrection, which, even
though it should fail, would be good propaganda. It
was inevitable that in the early moments of desjjair some
of the German workers should have listened gladly to
such proposals. And, indeed, it may seem somewhat of
a miracle that any large number of the German workers
should have been willing to have listened to any other
means of action. What indeed else was there to do ?

It is too long a story to go into the discussions over
this question. Perhaps a principle of Bebel's gives the
clearest explanation of the thought which eventually de-
cided the tactics of the socialists. Bebel has said many
times that he always considered it wise in politics to find
out what his opponent wanted him to do, and then not
to do it. And, to the minds of Bebel, Liebknecht, and
others of the more clear-headed leaders, there was no

THE FIGHT FOR EXISTENCE 219

doubt whatever that Bismarck was trying to force the
sociaHsts to commit crimes and outrages. Again and
again Bismarck's press declared: "What is most neces-
sary is to provoke the social-democrats to commit acts of
despair, to draw them into the open street, and there to
shoot them down." (28) Well, if this was actually what
Bismarck wanted, he failed utterly, because, as a matter
of fact, and despite every provocation, no considerable
section of the socialist party wavered in the slightest
from its determination to carry on its work. There was
a moment toward the end of '79 when the situation
seemed to be getting out of hand, and a secret conference
was held the next year at Wyden in Switzerland to de-
termine the policies of the party. In the report pub-
lished by the congress no names were given, as it was, of
course, necessary to maintain complete secrecy. How-
ever, it seemed clear to the delegates that, if they re-
sorted to terrorist methods, they would be destroyed as
the Russians, the French, the Spanish, and the Italians
had been when similar conditions confronted them. In
view of the present state of their organization, violence,
after all, could be merely a phrase, as they were not fit-
ted in strength or in numbers to combat Bismarck. One
of the delegates considered that Johann Most had exer-
cised an evil influence on many, and he urged that all
enlightened German socialists turn away from such men.
"Between the people of violence and the true revolution-
ists there will always be dissension." (29) Another
speaker maintained that Most could be no more consid-
ered a socialist. He is at best a Blanquist and, indeed,
one in the worst sense of the word, who had no other
aim than to pursue the bungling work of a revolution.
It is, therefore, necessary that the congress should de-
clare itself decidedly against Most and should expel him

220 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

from the party. (30) The word "revolution" has been
misunderstood, and the socialist members of the Reich-
stag have been reproved because they are not revolution-
ary. As a matter of fact, every socialist is a revolution-
ist, but one must not understand by revolution the ex-
pression of violence. The tactics of desperation, as the
Nihilists practice them, do not serve the purpose of Ger-
many. (31) As a result of the Wyden congress. Most
and Hasselmann were ejected from the party, and the
tactics of Bebel and Liebknecht were adopted.
. After 1880 there developed an underground socialist
movement that was most baffling and disconcerting to the
police. Socialist papers, printed in other countries, were
being circulated by the thousands in all parts of Ger-
many. Funds were being raised in some mysterious
manner to support a large body of trusted men in all
parts of the country who were devoting all their time
to secret organization and to the carrying on of propa-
ganda. The socialist organizations, which had been
broken up, seemed somehow or other to maintain their
relations. And, despite all that could be done by the
authorities, socialist agitation seemed to be going on even
more successfully than ever before. There was one loop-
hole which Bismarck had not been able to close, and this
of course was developed to the extreme by the social-
ists. Private citizens could not say what they pleased,
nor was it allowed to newspapers to print anything on
socialist lines. Nevertheless, parliamentary speeches
were privileged matter, and they could be sent anywhere
and be published anywhere. Bismarck of course tried to
suppress even this form of propaganda, and two of the
deputies were arrested on the ground that they were vio-
lating the new law. However, the Reichstag could not
be induced to sanction this interference with the freedom

THE FIGHT FOR EXISTENCE 221

of deputies. Bismarck then introduced a bill into the
Reichstag asking for power to punish any member who
abused his parliamentary position. There was to be a
court established consisting of thirteen deputies, and this
was to have power to punish refractory delegates by cen-
suring them, by obliging them to apologize to the House,
and by excluding them from the House. It was also
proposed that the Reichstag should in certain instances
prevent the publicity of its proceedings. This bill of Bis-
marck's aroused immense opposition. It was called "the
Muzzle Bill," and, despite all his efforts, it was defeated.
The anti-socialist law had been passed as an excep-
tional measure, and it was fully expected that at the end
of two years there would be nothing left of the socialists
in Germany. But, when the moment came for the law
to expire. Emperor Alexander II. of Russia was assassi-
nated by Nihilists. The German Emperor wrote to the
Chancellor urging him to do his utmost to persuade the
governments of Europe to combine against the forces of
anarchy and destruction. Prince Bismarck immediately
opened up negotiations with Russia, Austria, France,
Switzerland, and England. The Russian Government,
being asked to take the initiative, invited the powers to
a council at Brussels. As England did not accept the in-
vitation, France and Switzerland also declined. Austria
later withdrew her acceptance, with the result that Ger-
many and Russia concluded an extradition and dynamite
treaty for themselves, while on March 31, 1 881, the anti-
socialist law was reenacted for another period. In 1882
the Niederwald plot against the Imperial family was dis-
covered. Various arrests were made, and three men
avowedly anarchists were sentenced to death in Decem-
ber, 1884. In 1885 a high police official at Frankfort
was murdered, and an anarchist named Lieske was ex-

222 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

ecuted as an accomplice. These terrorist acts materially
aided Bismarck in his warfare on the social democrats.
Again and again large towns were put in a minor state
of siege, with the military practically in control. Meet-
ings were dispersed, suspected papers suppressed, and all
tyranny that can be conceived of exercised upon all those
suspected of sympathy with the socialists. Yet everyone
had to admit that the socialists had not been checked.
Not only did their organization still exist, but it was all
the time carrying on a vigorous agitation, both by meet-
ings and by the circulation of literature. Papers printed
abroad were being smuggled into the country in great
quantities ; socialist literature was even being introduced
into the garrisons ; and there seemed to be no dealing with
associations, because no more was one dissolved than two
arose to take its place.

Von Puttkamer himself reported to the Reichstag in
1882, "It is undoubted that it has not been possible by
means of the law of October, 1878, to wipe social-democ-
racy from the face of the earth or even to shake it to
the center." (32) Indeed, Liebknecht was bold enough
to say in 1884: "You have not succeeded in destroying
our organization, and I am convinced that you will never
succeed. I believe, indeed, it would be the greatest mis-
fortune for you if you did succeed. The anarchists, who
are now carrying on their work in Austria, have no foot-
ing in Germany — and why? Because in Germany the
mad plans of those men are wrecked on the compact
organization of social-democracy, because the German
proletariat, in view of the fruitlessness of your socialist
law, has not abandoned hope of attaining its ends peace-
fully by means of socialistic propaganda and agitation.
If — and I have said this before — if your law were not
pro nihilo, it would be pro nihilismo. If the German

THE FIGHT FOR EXISTENCE 223

proletariat no longer believed in the efficacy of our pres-
ent tactics; if we found that we could no longer main-
tain intact the organization and cohesion of the party,
what would happen? We should simply declare — we
have no more to do with the guidance of the party; we
can no longer be responsible. The men in power do not
wish that the party should continue to exist ; it is hoped
to destroy us — well, no party allows itself to be de-
stroyed, for there is above all things the law of self-de-
fense, of self-preservation, and, if the organized direc-
tion fails, you will have a condition of anarchy, in which
everything is left to the individual. And do you really .
believe — you who have so often praised the bravery of
the Germans up to the heavens, when, it has been to your
interest to do so — do you really believe that the hun-
dreds of thousands of German social-democrats are cow-
ards ? Do you believe that what has happened in Russia
would not be possible in Germany if you succeeded in
bringing about here the conditions which exist there?"
(33) Both Bebel and Liebknecht taunted the Chancel-
lor with his failure to drive the socialists to commit acts
of violence. "The Government may be sure," said Lieb-
knecht in 1886, "that we shall not, now or ever, go upon
the bird-lime, that we shall never be such fools as to play
the game of our. enemies by attempts . . . the more
madly you carry on, the sooner you will come to the end ;
the pitcher goes to the well until it breaks." (34)

At the end of this year the reports given from the
several states of the working out of the anti-socialist
law were most discouraging to the Chancellor. From
everywhere the report came that agitation was uninter-
mittent, and being carried on with zeal and success. And
Bebel said publicly that nowhere was the socialist party
more numerous or better organized than in the districts

224 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

where the minor state of siege had been proclaimed.
The year 1886 was a sensational one. Nine of the so-
cialists, including Bebel, Dietz, Auer, Von Vollmar,
Frohme — all deputies — were charged with taking part in
a secret and illegal organization. All the accused were
sentenced to imprisonment for six or nine months, Bebel
and his parliamentary associates receiving the heavier
penalty. The Reichstag asked for reports upon the
working of the law. Again the discouraging news came
that the movement seemed to be growing faster than
ever before.

The crushing by repressive measures did not, however,
exhaust Bismarck's plans for annihilating the socialists.
At the same time he outlined an extraordinary program
for winning the support of the working classes. Early in
the eighties he proposed his great scheme of social legis-
lation, intended to improve radically the lot of the toil-
ers. Compulsory insurance against accident, illness, in-
validity, and old age was instituted as a measure for giv-
ing more security in life to the working classes. Insur-
ance against unemployment was also proposed, and Bis-
marck declared that the State should guarantee to the
toilers the right to work. This began an era of immense
social reforms that actually wiped out some of the worst
slums in the great industrial centers, replaced them with
large and beautiful dwellings for the working classes, and
made over entire cities. The discussions in the Reich-
stag now seemed to be largely concerned with the prob-
lem of the working classes and with devising plans to
obliterate the influence of the socialists over the workers
and to induce them once more to ally themselves to the
monarchy and to the Junkers.

For some reason wholly mysterious to Bismarck, all
his measures against the socialists failed. Every assault

THE FIGHT FOR EXISTENCE 225

made upon them seemed to increase their power, while
even the great reforms he was instituting seemed some-
how to be credited to the agitation of the socialists. In-
stead of proving the good will of the ruling class, these
reforms seemed only to prove its weakness; and they
were looked upon generally as belated efforts to remedy
old and grievous wrongs which, in fact, made necessary
the protests of the socialists. The result was that tens
of thousands of workingmen were flocking each year into
the camp of the socialists, and at each election the social-
ist votes increased in a most dreadful and menacing man-
ner. When the anti-socialist law was put into effect, the
party polled under 450,000 votes. After twelve years of
underground work as outlaws, the party polled 1,427,000
votes,. Despite all the efforts of Bismarck and all the im-
mense power of the Government, socialism, instead of be-
ing crushed, was 1,000,000 souls stronger after twelve
years of suffering under tyranny than it was in the be-
ginning. This of course would not do at all, and every-
one saw it clearly enough except the Iron Chancellor. In-
furiated by his own failure and unwilling to confess de-
feat, he pleaded once more, in 1890, for the reenactment
of the anti-socialist law and, indeed, that it should be
made a permanent part of the penal code of the Empire.
He even sought further powers and asked the Reichstag
to give him a law that would enable him to expel not only
from districts proclaimed to be in a state of siege, but
from Germany altogether, those who were known to
hold socialist views. The Reichstag, however, refused
to grant him either request, and on September 30, 1890,
just twelve years after its birth, the anti-socialist law
was repealed.

That night was a glorious one for the socialists, as
well as a very dreadful one for Bismarck and those

226 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

Others who had made prodigious but futile efforts to de-
stroy socialism. Berlin was already a socialist, strong-
hold, and its entire people that night came into the streets
to sing songs of thanksgiving. Streets, parks, public
places, cafes, theaters were filled with merrymakers, re-
joicing with songs, with toasts to the leading socialists,
and with boisterous welcomes to the exiles who were re-
turning. All night long the red flag waved, and the Mar-
seillaise was sung, as all that passion of love, enthusiasm,
and devotion for a great cause, which, for twelve long
years, had been brutally suppressed, burst forth in floods
of joy. "He [Bismarck] has had at his entire disposal
for more than a quarter of a century," said Liebknecht,
"the police, the army, the capital, and the power of the
State — in brief, all the means of mechanical force. We
had only our just right, our firm conviction, our bared
breasts to oppose him with, and it is we who have con-
quered! Our arms were the best. In the course of time
brute power must yield to the moral factors, to the logic
of things. Bismarck lies crushed to the earth — and so-
cial democracy is the strongest party in Get;many!
. . . The essence of revolution lies not in the means,
but in the end. Violence ' has been, for thousands of
years, a reactionary factor." (35) Certainly, the moral
victory was immense. There had been a twelve-years-
long torture of a great party, in which every man who
was known to be sympathetic was looked upon as a crim-
inal and an outlaw. Yet, despite every effort made to
drive the socialists into outrages, they never wavered the
slightest from their grim determination to depend solely
upon peaceable methods. It is indeed marvelous that the
German socialists should have stood the test and that,
despite the most barbarous persecution, they should have
been able to hold their forces together, to restrain their

THE FIGHT FOR EXISTENCE 227

natural anger, and to keep their faith in the ultimate vic-
tory of peaceable, legal, and political methods. Prome-
theus, bound to his rock and tortured by all the furies of
a malignant Jupiter, did not rise superior to his tormen-
tor with more grandeur than did the social democracy of
Germany.

Violence does indeed seem to be a reactionary force.
The use of it by the anarchists against the existing
regime seems to have deprived them of all sympathy
and support. More and more they became isolated from
even those in whose name they claimed to be fighting.
So the violence of Bismarck, intended to uproot and
destroy the deepest convictions of a great body of work-
ingmen, deprived him and his circle of all popular sym-
pathy and support. Year by year he became weaker,
and the futility of his efforts made him increasingly bit-
ter and violent. At last even those for whom he had
been fighting had to put him aside. On the other hand,
those he fought with his poisoned weapons became
stronger and stronger, their spirit grew more and more
buoyant, their confidence in success more and more cer-
tain. And, when at last the complete victory was won,
it was heralded throughout the world, and from thou-
sands of great meetings, held in nearly every civilized
country, there came to the German social democracy tele-
grams and resolutions of congratulation. The mere fact
that the Germany party polled a million and a half votes
was in itself an inspiration to the workers of all lands,
and in the elections which followed in France, Italy, Bel-
gium, Denmark, Sweden, and other countries the social-
ists vastly increased their votes and more firmly estabr
lished their position as a parliamentary force. In 1892
France polled nearly half a million votes, little Belgium
followed with three hundred and twenty thousand, while

228 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

in Denmark and Switzerland the strength of the social-
ists was quadrupled. Instead of a mere handful of the-
orists, the socialists were now numbered by the million.
Their movement was world-wide, and the program of
every political party in the various countries was based
upon the principles laid down by Marx. The doctrines
which he had advocated from '47 to '64, and fought des-
perately to retain throughout all the struggles with Ba-
kounin, were now the foundation principles of the move-
ment in Germany, France, Italy, Austria, Switzerland,
Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Britain,
and even in other countries east and west of Europe.

CHAPTER X

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM

At the beginning of the nineties the socialists were
jubilant. Their great victory in Germany and the enor-
mous growth of the movement in all countries assured
them that the foundations had at last been laid for the
great world-wide movement that they had so long
dreamed of. Internal struggles had largely disappeared,
and the mighty energies of the movement were being
turned to the work of education and of organization.
Great international socialist congresses were now the
natural outgrowth of powerful and extensive national
movements. Yet, almost at this very moment there was
forming in the Latin countries a new group of dissi-
dents who were endeavoring to resurrect what Bakounin
called in 1871 French socialism, and what our old friend
Guillaume recognized tp be a revival of the principles
and methods of the anarchist International.* And, in-
deed, in 1895, what may perhaps be best described as the
renascence of anarchism appeared in France under an
old and influential name. Up to that time syndicalism
signified nothing more than trade unionism, and the
French syndicats were merely associations of workmen
struggling to obtain higher wages and shorter hours of
labor. But in 1895 the term began to have a different

*His words are: "What is the General Confederation of
Labor, if not the continuation of the International ?" Documents
et Souvenirs, Vol. IV, p. vii.

229

230 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

meaning, and almost immediately it made the tour of the
world as a unique and dreadful revolutionary philosophy.
It became a new "red specter," with a menacing and
subversive program, that created a veritable furore of
discussion in the newspapers and magazines of all coun-
tries. Rarely has a movement aroused such universal
agitation, awakened such world-wide discussions, and
called forth such expressions of alarm as this one, that
seemed suddenly to spring from the depths of the under-
world, full-armed and ready for battle. Everywhere
syndicalism was heralded as an entirely new philosophy.
Nothing like it had ever been known before in the world.
Multitudes rushed to greet it as a kind of new revela-
tion, while other multitudes instinctively looked upon it
with suspicion as something that promised once more to
introduce dissension into the world of labor.

What is syndicalism ? Whence came it and why ? The
first question has been answered in a hundred books
written in the last ten years. In all languages the mean-
ing of this new philosophy of industrial warfare has been
made clear. There is hardly a country in the world that
has not printed several books on this new movement,
and, although the word itself cannot be found in our
dictionaries, hardly anyone who reads can have escaped
gaining some acquaintance with its purport. The other
question, however, has concerned few, and almost no one
has traced the origin of syndicalism to that militant group
of anarchists whom the French Government had endeav-
ored to annihilate. After the series of tragedies which
ended with the .murder of Carnot, the French police
hunted the anarchists from pillar to post. Their groups
were broken up, their papers suppressed, and their lead-
ers kept constantly under the surveillance of police
agents. Every man with anarchist sympathies was

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 231

hounded as an outlaw, and in 1894 they were broken,
scattered, and isolated. Scorning all relations with the
political groups and indeed excluded from them, as from
other sections of the labor movement, by their own tac-
tics, they found themselves almost alone, without the op-
portunity even of propagating their views. Facing a
blank wall, they began then to discuss the necessity of
radically changing their tactics, and in that year one of
the most militant of them, ^fimile Pouget, who had been
arrested several times for provoking riots, undertook to
persuade his associates to enter actively into the trade
unions. In his peculiar argot he wrote in Pere Peinard:
"If there is a group into which the anarchists should
thrust themselves, it is evidently the trade union. The
coarse vegetables would make an awful howl if the an-
archists, whom they imagine they have gagged, should
profit by the circumstance to infiltrate themselves in
droves into the trade unions and spread their ideas there
without any noise or blaring of trumpets." (i) This
plea had its effect, and more and more anarchists began
to join the trade unions, while their friends, already in
the unions, prepared the way for their coming. Pellou-
tier, a zealous and efficient administrator, had already
become the dominant spirit in one entire section of the
French labor movement, thatof the Bourses du Travail.
In another section, the carpenter Tortellier, a roving agi-
tator and militant anarchist, had already persuaded a
large number of unions to declare for the general strike
as the sole effective weapon for revolutionary purposes.
Moreover, Guerard, Griffuelhes, and other opponents of
political action were preparing the ground in the unions
for an open break with the socialists. By 1896 the
strength of the anarchists in the trade unions was so
great that the French dele^^ates to the international so-

232 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

cialist congress at London were divided into two sections :
one in sympathy with the views of the anarchists, the
other hostile to them. Such notable anarchists as Tortel-
lier, Malatesta, Grave, Pouget, Pelloutier, Delesalle,
Hamon, and Guerard were sent to London as the repre-
sentatives of the French trade unions. Although the
anarchists had been repeatedly expelled from socialist
congresses, and the rules prohibited their admittance,
these men could not be denied a hearing so long as they
came as the representatives of bona Me trade unions. As
a result, the anarchists, speaking as trade unionists,
fought throughout the congress against political action.
A typical declaration was that of Tortellier, when he
said : "If only those in favor of political action are ad-
mitted to congresses, the Latin races will abandon the
congresses. The Italians are drifting away from the
idea of political action. Properly organized, the workers
can settle their affairs without any intervention on the
part of the legislature." (2) Guerard, of the railway
workers, holding much the same views, urged the con-
gress to adopt the general strike, on the ground that it is
"the most revolutionary weapon we have." (3) Despite
their threats and demands, the anarchists were com-
pletely ignored, although they were numerous in the
French, Italian, Spanish, and Dutch delegations. At last
it became clear to the anarchists that the international,
socialist congresses would not admit them, if it were
possible to keep them out, nor longer discuss with
them the wisdom of political action. Consequently,
the anarchists left London, clear at last on this one point,
that the socialists were firmly determined to have no fur-
ther dealings with them. The same decision had been
made at The Hague in 1872, again in 1889 at the interna-

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 233

tional congress at Paris, then in 1891 at Brussels, again
in 1893 at Zurich, and finally at London in 1896.

The anarchists that returned to Paris from the Lon-
don congress were not slow in taking their revenge.
They had already threatened in London to take the work-
ers of the Latin countries out of the socialist movement,
but no one apparently had given much heed to their re-
marks. In reality, however, they were in a position to
carry out their threats, and the insults which they felt
they had just suifered at the hands of the socialists
made them more determined than ever to induce the
unions to declare war on the socialist parties of France,
Italy, Spain, and Holland. Plans were also laid for the
building up of a trade-union International based largely
on the principles and tactics of what they now called
"revolutionary syndicalism."

The year before (1895) the General Confederation of
Labor had been launched at Limoges. Except for its
declaration in favor of the general strike as a revolu-
tionary weapon, the congress developed no new syndi-
calist doctrines. It was at Tours, in 1896, that the
French unions, dominated by the anarchists, declared
they would no longer concern themselves with reforms;
they would abandon childish efforts at amelioration ; and
instead they would constitute themselves into a con-
scious fighting minority that was to lead the working
class with no further delay into open rebellion. In their
opinion, it was time to begin the bitter, implacable fight
that was not to end until the working class had freed it-
self from wage slavery. The State was not worth con-
quering, parliaments were inherently corrupt, and, there-
fore, political action was futile. Other means, more
direct and revolutionary, must be employed to destroy
capitalism. As the very existence of society depends

234 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

upon the services of labor, what could be more simple
than for labor to cease to serve society until its rights
are assured? Thus argued the French trade unionists,
and the strike was adopted as the supreme war measure.
Partial strikes were to broaden into industrial strikes,
and industrial strikes into general strikes. The struggle
between the classes was to take the form of two hostile
camps, firmly resolved upon a war that would finish only
when the one or the other of the antagonists had been
utterly crushed. When John Brown marched with his
little band to attack the slave-owning aristocracy of the
South, he became the forerunner of our terrible Civil
War. It was the same spirit that moved the French
trade unionists. Although pitiably weak in numbers and
poor in funds, they decided to stop all parleyings with
the enemy and to fire the first gun.

The socialist congress in London was held in July,
and the French trade-union congress at Tours was held
in September of the same year. The anarchists were out
in their full strength, prepared to make reprisals on the
socialists. It was after declaring : "The conquest of po-
litical power is a chimera," (4) that Guerard launched
forth in his fiery argument for the revolutionary general
strike: "The partial strikes fail because the working-
men become demoralized and succumb under the intimi-
dation of the employers, protected by the government.
The general strike will last a short while, and its repres-
sion will be impossible ; as to intimidation, it is still less
to be feared. The necessity of defending the factories,
workshops, manufactories, stores, etc., will scatter and
disperse the army. . . . And then, in the fear that
the strikers may damage the railways, the signals, the
works of art, the government will be obliged to protect
the 39,ocx3 kilometers of railroad lines by drawing up the

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 235

troops all along them. The 300,000 men of the active
anny, charged with the surveillance of 39 million meters,
will be isolated from one another by 130 meters, and this
can be done only on the condition of abandoning the pro-
tection of the depots, of the stations, of the factories,
etc. . . . and of abandoning the employers to them-
selves, thus leaving the field free in the large cities to the
rebellious workingmen. The principal force of the gen-
eral strike consists in its power of imposing itself. A
strike in one branch of industry must involve other
branches. The general strike cannot be decreed in ad-
vance; it will burst forth suddenly; a strike of the rail-
way men, for instance, if declared, will be the signal for
the general strike. It will be the duty of militant work-
ingmen, when this signal is given, to make their com-
rades in the trade unions leave their work. Those who
continue to work on that day will be compelled, or forced,
to quit. . . . The general strike will be the Revolu-
tion, peaceful or not." (5)

Here is a new program of action, several points of
which are worthy of attention. It is clear that the gen-
eral strike is here conceived of as a panacea, an unfailing
weapon that obviates the necessity of political parties,
parliamentary work, or any action tending toward the
capture of political power. It is granted that it must
end in civil war, but it is thought that this war cannot
fail ; it must result in a complete social revolution. Even
more significant is the thought that it will burst forth
suddenly, without requiring any preliminary education,
extensive preparations, or even widespread organization.
In one line it is proposed as an automatic revolution; in
another it is said that the militant workingmen are ex-
pected to force the others to quit work. Out of 11,000,-
000 toilers in France, about 1,000,000 are organized. Out

236 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

of this million, about 400,000 belong to the Confedera-
tion, and, out of this number, it is doubtful if half are
in favor of a general strike. The proposition of Guer-
ard then presents itself as follows: that a minority of
organized men shall force not only the vast majority
of their fellow unionists but twenty times their number
of unorganized men to quit work in order to launch the
war for emancipation. Under the compulsion of 200,000
men, a nation of 40,000,000 is to be forced immediately,
without palaver or delay, to revolutionize society.

The next year, at Toulouse, the French unions again
assembled, and here it was that Pouget and Delesalle,
both anarchists, presented the report which outlined still
another war measure, that of sabotage. The newly ar-
rived was there baptized, and received by all, says Pou-
get, with warm enthusiasm. This sabotage was hardly
born before it, too, made a tour of the world, creating
everywhere the same furore of discussion that had been
aroused by syndicalism. It presents itself in such a mul-
titude of forms that it almost evades definition. If a
worker is badly paid and returns bad work for bad pay,
he is a saboteur. If a strike is lost, and the workmen
return only to break the machines, spoil the products,
and generally disorganize a factory, they are saboteurs.
The idea of sabotage is that any dissatisfied workman
shall undertake to break the machine or spoil the product
of the machines in order to render the conduct of in-
dustry unprofitable, if not actually impossible. It may
range all the way from machine obstruction or destruc-
tion to dynamiting, train wrecking, and arson. It may
be some petty form of malice, or it may extend to every
act advocated by our old friends, the terrorists.

The work of one other congress must be mentioned.
At Lyons (1901) it was decided that an inquiry should

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 237

be sent out to all the affiliated unions to. find out exactly
how the proposed great social revolution was to be car-
ried out. For several years the Confederation had
sought to launch a revolutionary general strike, but so
many of the rank and file were asking, "What would we
do, even if the general strike were successful?" that it
occurred to the leaders it might be well to find out. As
a result, they sent out the following list of questions:
"(i) How would your union act in order to transform
itself from a group for combat into a group for produc-
tion?

"(2) How would you act in order to take possession
of the machinery pertaining to your industry?

"(3) How do you conceive the functions of the or-
ganized shops and factories in the future?

"(4) If your union is a group within the system of
highways, of transportation of products or of passengers,
of distribution, etc., how do you conceive of its func-
tioning ?

"(5) What will be your relations to your federation of
trade or of industry after your reorganization ?

"(6) On what principle would the distribution of
products take place, and how would the productive
groups procure the raw material for themselves ?

"(7) What part would the Bourses du Travail play
in the transformed society, and what would be their task
with reference to the statistics and to the distribution of
products?" (6)

The report dealing with the results of this inquiry con-
tains such a variety of views that it is not easy to sum-
marize it. It seems, however, to have been more or less
agreed that each group of producers was to control the
industry in which it was engaged. ' The peasants were to
take the land. The miners were to take the mines. The

238 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

railway workers were to take the railroads. Every trade
union was to obtain possession of the tools of its trade,
and the new society was to be organized on the basis
of a trade-union ownership of industry. In the villages,
towns, and cities the various trades were then to be or-
ganized into a federation whose duty would be to ad-
minister all matters of joint interest in their localities.
The local federations were then to be united into a Gen-
eral Confederation, to whose administration were to be
left only those public services which were of national im-
portance. The General Confederation was also to serve
as an intermediary between the various trades and locals
and as an agency for representing the interests of all the
unions in international relations.

This is in brief the meaning of syndicalism. It differs
from socialism in both aim and methods. The aim of
the latter is the control by the community of the means
of production. The aim of syndicalism is the control
by autonomous trade unions of that production carried
on by those trades. It does not seek to refashion the
State or to aid in its evolution toward social democracy.
It will have nothing to do with political action or with
any attempt to improve the machinery of democracy.
The masses must arise, take possession of the mines,
factories, railroads, fields, and all industrial processes
and natural resources, and then, through trade unions or
industrial unions, administer the new economic system.
Furthermore, the syndicalists differ from the socialists
in their conception of the class struggle. To the social-
ist the capitalist is as much the product of our economic
system as the worker. No socialist believes that the
capitalist is individually to blame for our economic ills.
The syndicalist dissents from this view. To him the
capitalist is an individual enemy. He must be fought

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 239

and destroyed. There is no form of mediation or con-
ciliation possible between the worker and his employer.
Conditions^ must, therefore, be made intolerable for the
capitalist.; Work must be done badly. Machines must
be destroyed. Industrial processes must be subjected to
chaos. Every worker must be inspired with the one end
and aim of destruction. Without the cooperation of the
worker, capitalist production must break down. There-
fore, the revolutionary syndicalist will fight, if possible,
openly through his union, or, if that is impossible, by
stealth, as an individual, to ruin his employer. The world
of to-day is to be turned into incessant civil war between
capital and labor. Not only the two classes, but the indi-
viduals of the two classes, must be constantly engaged
in a deadly conflict. There is to be no truce until the
fight is ended. The loyal workman is to be considered a
traitor. The union that makes contracts or participates
in collective bargaining is to be ostracized. And even
those who are disinclined to battle will be forced into
the ranks'by compulsion. "Those who continue to work
will be compelled to quit," says Guerard. The strike is
not to be merely a peaceable abstention from work. The
very machines are to be made to strike by being ren-
dered incapable of production. These are the methods
of the militant revolutionary syndicalists.*

Toward the end of the nineties another element came
to the aid of the anarchists. It is difficult to class this
group with any certainty. They are neither socialists nor

* In justice to the French unions it must be said that a large
number, probably a considerable majority, do not share these
views. The views of the latter are almost identical with those
of the American and English unions; but at present the new
anarchists are in the saddle, although their power appears to be
waning.

240 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

anarchists. They remind one of those Bakouninists that
Marx once referred to as "lawyers without cases, physi-
cians without patients and knowledge, students of bil-
liards, etc." (7) "They are good-natured, gentlemanly,
cultured people," says Sombart; "people with spotless
linen, good manners and fashionably dressed wives ; peo-
ple with whom one holds social intercourse as with one's
equals; people who would at first sight hardly be taken
as the representatives of a new movement whose object
it is to prevent socialism from becoming a mere middle-
class belief." (8) In a word, they appear to be indi-
viduals wearied with the unrealities of life and seeking
to overcome their ennui by, at any rate, discussing the
making of revolutions. With their "myths," their "re-
flections on violence," their appeals to physical vigor and
to the glory of combat, as well as with their incessant
attacks on the socialist movement, they have given very
material aid to the anarchist element in the syndicalist
movement. For a number of years I have read faith-
fully Le Mouvement Socialiste, but I confess that I have
not understood their dazzling metaphysics, and I am
somewhat comforted to see that both Levine (9) and
Lewis (10) find them frequently incomprehensible.

Without injustice to this group of intellectuals, I think
it may be truthfully said that they have contributed noth-
ing essential to the doctrines of syndicalism as developed
by the trades unionists themselves; and Edward Berth,
in Les Nouveaux Aspects du Socialisme, has partially ex-
plained why, without meaning to do so. "It has often
been observed," he says, "that the anarchists are by
origin artisan, peasant, or aristocrat. Rousseau repre-
sents, obviously, the anarchism of the artisan. His re-
» public is a little republic of free and independent crafts-
men. . . . Proudhon is a peasant in his heart . . . and,

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 241

if we finally take Tolstoi, we find here an anarchism of
worldly or aristocratic origin. Tolstoi is a blase aristo-
crat, disgusted with civilization by having too much eaten
of it." (11) Whether or not this characterization of Tol-
stoi is justified, there can be no question that many of this
type rushed to the aid of syndicalism. Its savage vigor
appeals to some artists, decadents, and dedasses. Neuro-
tic as a rule, they seem to hunger for the stimulus which
comes by association with the merely physical power and
vigor of the working class. The navvy, the coalheaver,
or "yon rower . . . the muscles all a-ripple on his back,"
(12) awakens in them a worshipful admiration, even as it
did in the eifete Cleon. Such a theory as syndicalism,
declares Sombart, "could only have grown up in a coun-
try possessing so high a culture as France ; that it could
have been thought out only by minds of the nicest per-
ception, by people who have become quite blase, whose
feelings require a very strong stimulus before they can
be stirred; people who have something of the artistic
temperament, and, consequently, look disdainfully on
what has been called 'Philistinism' — on business, on mid-
dle-class ideals, and so forth. They are, as it were, the
fine silk as contrasted with the plain wool of ordinary
people. They detest the common, everyday round as
much as they hate what is natural; they might be called
'Social Sybarites.' Such are the people who have created
the syndicalist system." (13) On one point Sombart is
wrong. All the essential doctrines of revolutionary syn-
dicalism, as a matter of fact, originated with the an-
archists, in the unions, and the most that can be said for
the "Sybarites" is that they elaborated and mystified
these doctrines.

There are those, of course, who maintain that syndical-
ism is wholly a natural and inevitable product of eco-

242 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

nomic forces, and, so far as the actual syndicalist move-
ment is concerned, that is unquestionably true. But in all
the maze of philosophy and doctrine that has been thrown
about the actual French movement, we find the traces of
two extraneous forces — the anarchists who availed them-
selves of the opportunity that an awakening trade union-
ism gave them, and those intellectuals of leisure, culture,
and refinement who found the methods of political social-
ism too tame to satisfy their violent revolt against things
bourgeois. And the philosophical syndicalism that was
born of this union combines utopianism and anarchism.
The yearning esthetes found satisfaction in the rugged
energy and physical daring of the men of action, while
the latter were astonished and flattered 'to find their
simple war measures adorned with metaphysical abstrac-
tions and arousing an immense furore among the most
learned and fashionable circles of Europe.

However, something in addition to personality is
needed to explain the rise of syndicalist sociailism in
France. Like anarchism, syndicalism is a natural prod-
uct of certain French and Italian conditions. It is not
strange that the Latin peoples have in the past harbored
the ideas of anarchism, or that now they harbor the ideas
of syndicalism. The enormous proportion of small prop-
erty owners in the French nation is the economic basis
for a powerful individualism. Anything which interferes
with the liberty of the individual is abhorred, and noth-
ing awakens a more lively hatred than centralization and
State power. The vast extent of small industry, with
the apprentice, journeyman, and master- workman, has
wielded an influence over the mentality of the French
workers. Berth, for instance, follows Proudhon in con-
ceiving of the future commonwealth as a federation of
innumerable little workshops. Gigantic industries, such

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 243

as are known in Germany, England, and America, seem
to be problems quite foreign to the mind of the typical
Latin worker. He believes that, if he can be left alone
in his little industry, and freed from exploitation, he,
like the peasant, will be supreme, possessing both liberty
and abundance. He will, therefore, tolerate willingly
neither the interference of a centralized State nor favor
a centralized syndicalism. Industry must be given into
the hands of the workers, and, when he speaks of indus-
try, he has in mind workshops, which, in the socialism of
the Germans, the English, and the Americans, might be
left for a long time to come in private hands.

In harmony with the above facts, we find that the
strongest centers of syndicalism in France, Italy, and
Spain are in those districts where the factory system is
very backward. Where syndicalism and anarchism pre-
vail most strongly, we find conditions of economic im-
maturity which strikingly resemble those of England in
the time of Owen. In all these districts trade unionism is
undeveloped. When it exists at all, it is more a feeling
out for solidarity than the actual existence of solidarity./
It is the first groping toward unity that so often bringsl
riots and violence, because organization is absent and]
the feeling of power does not exist. Carl Legien, thi
leader of the great German unions, said at the interna-
tional socialist congress at Stuttgart (1907) : "As soon
as the French have an actual trade-union organization,
they will cease discussing blindly the general strike, di-
rect action, and sabotage." (14) Vliegen, the Dutch
leader, went even further when he declared at the previ-
ous congress, at Amsterdam (1904), that it is not the
representatives of the strong organizations of England,
Germany, and Denmark who wish the general strike ; it is
the representatives of France, Russia, and Holland,

244 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

where the trade-union organization is feeble or does not
exist. (15)

Still another factor forces the French trade unions
to rely upon violence, and that is their poverty. The
trade-unionists in the Latin countries dislike to pay
dues, and the whole organized labor movement as a re-
sult lives constantly from hand to mouth. "The funda-
mental condition which determines the policy of direct
action," says Dr. Louis Levine in his excellent mono-
graph on "The Laboi" Movement in France," "is the pov
erty of French syndicalism. Except for the Federation
du Livre, only a very few federations pay a more or less
regular strike benefit ; the rest have barely means enough
to provide for their administrative and organizing ex-
penses and cannot collect any strike funds worth mention-
ing. . . . The French workingmen, therefore, are forced
to fall back on other means during strikes. Quick action,
intimidation, sabotage, are then suggested to them by
their very situation and by their desire to win." (16)
That this is an accurate analysis is, I think, proved by
the fact that the biggest strikes and the most unruly are
invariably to be found at the very beginning of the
attempts to organize trade unions. That is certainly
true of England, and in our own country the great strikes
of the seventies were the birth-signs of trade unionism.
In France, Italy, and Spain, where trade unionism is still
in its infancy, we find that strikes are more unruly and
violent than in other countries. It is a mistake to believe
that riots, sabotage, and crime are the result of organiza-
tion, or the product of a philosophy of action. They are
the acts of the weak and the desperate; the product of
a mob psychology that seems to be roused to action when-
ever and wherever the workers first begin to realize the
faintest glimmering of solidarity. History clearly proves

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 245

that turbulence in strikes tends to disappear as the work-
ers develop organized strength. In most countries viw=--\
lence has been frankly recognized as a weakness, and j
tremendous efforts have been made by the workers them- I
selves to render violence unnecessary by developing power /
through organization. But in France the very acts that j
result from weakness and despair have been greeted |
with enthusiasm by the anarchists and the effete Intel- I
lectuals as the beginning of new and improved revolu- \
tionary methods. ;

Both, then, in their philosophy and in their methods,
anarchism and syndicalism have much in common, but
there also exist certain differences which cannot be over-
looked. Anarchism is a doctrine of individualism; syn-
dicalism is a doctrine of working-class action. Anarchism
appeals only to the individual; syndicalism appeals also
to a class. Furthermore, anarchism is a remnant of
eighteenth-century philosophy, while syndicalism is a
product of an immature factory system. Marx and
Engels frequently spoke of anarchism as a petty-bour-
geois philosophy, but in the early syndicalism of Robert
Owen they saw more than that, considering it as the
forerunner of an actual working-class movement. When
these differences have been stated, there is little more to
be said, and, on the whole, Yvetot was justified in say-
ing at the congress of Toulouse (1910) : "I am re-
proached with confusing syndicalism and anarchism. It
is not my fault if anarchism and syndicalism have the
same ends in view. The former pursues the integral
emancipation of the individual; the latter the integral
emancipation of the workingman. I find the whole of
syndicalism in anarchism." (17) When we leave
the theories of syndicalism to study its methods, we
find them identical with those of the anarchists. The

246 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT .

general strike is, after all, exactly the same method that
Bakounin was constantly advocating in the days of the
old International. The only difference is this, that Ba-
kounin sought the aid of "the people," while the syndical-
ists rely upon the working class. Furthermore, when one
places the statement of Guerard on the general strike*
alongside of the statement of Kropotkin on the revolu-
tion,t one can observe no important difference.

While it is true that some syndicalists believe that the
general strike may be solely a peaceable abstention from
work, most of them are convinced that such a strike
would surely meet with defeat. As Buisson says: "If
the general strike remains the revolution of folded arms,
if it does not degenerate into a violent insurrection, one
cannot see how a cessation of work of fifteen, thirty, or
even sixty days could bring into the industrial regime
and into the present social system changes great enough
to determine their fall." (18) To be sure, the syndical-
ists do not lay so much emphasis on the abolition of
government as do the anarchists, but their plan leads to
nothing less than that. If "the capitalist class is to be
locked out" — whatever that may mean — one must con-
clude that the workers intend in some manner without
the use of public powers to gain control of the tools of
production. In any case, they will be forced, in order
to achieve any possible success, to take the factories, the
mines, and the mills and to put the work of production
into the hands of the masses. If the State interferes, as
it undoubtedly will in the most vigorous manner, the
strikers will be forced to fight the State. In other words,
the general strike will necessarily become an insurrection,
and the people without arms will be forced to carry on a

* See pp. 234, 23s, supra.
t See p. 52, supra.

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 247

civil war against the military powers of the Government.

If the general strike, therefore, is only insurrection
in disguise, sabotage is but another name for the Propa-
ganda of the Deed. Only, in this case, the deed is to be
committed against the capitalist, while with the older
anarchists a crowned head, a general, or a police official
was the one to be destroyed. To-day property is to be
assailed, machines broken and smashed, mines flooded,
telegraph wires cut, and any other methods used that will
render the tools of production unusable. This deed may
be committed en masse, or it may be committed by an
individual. It is when Pouget grows enthusiastic over
sabotage that we find in him the same spirit that actuated
Brousse and Kropotkin when they despaired of education
and sought to arouse the people by committing dramatic
acts of violence. In other words, the saboteur abandons
mass action in favor of ineffective and futile assaults
upon men or property.

This brief survey of the meaning of syndicalism,
whence it came, and why, explains the antagonism that
had to arise between it and socialism.* Not only was it
frankly intended to displace the socialist political parties

*I have not dealt in this chapter with the Industrial Workers
of the World, which is the American representative of syndi-
calist ideas. First, because the American organization has d e-
veloped no theories of importance. Their chief work has been
to popularize some of the French ideas. Second, because the
I. W. W. has not yet won for itself a place in the labor move-
ment. It has done much agitation, but as yet no organization
to speak of. Furthermore, there is great confusion of ideas
among the various factions and elements, and it would be diffi-
cult to state views which are held in common by all of them.
It should be said, however, that all the American syndicalists
have emphasized industrial unionism, that is to say, organiza-
tion by industries instead of by crafts — an idea that the French
lay no stress upon. ^

I

248 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

of Europe, but every step it has taken was accompanied
with an attack upon, the doctrines and the methods of
modern socialism. And, in fact, the syndicalists are most
interesting when they leave their own thoeries and turn
their guns upon the socialist parties of the present day.
In reading the now extensive literature on syndicalism,
one finds endless chapters devoted to pointing out the
weaknesses and faults of political socialism. Like the
Bakouninists, the chief strength of the revolutionary
unionists lies in criticism rather than in any constructive
thought or action of their own. The battle of to-day
is, however, a very unequal one. In the International,
two groups — comparatively alike in size — fought over
certain theories that, up to that time, were not embodied
in a movement. They quarreled over tactics that were
yet untried and over theories that were then purely specu-
lative. To-day the syndicalists face a foe that embraces
millions of loyal adherents. At the international gather-
ings of trade-union officials, as well as at the immense
international congresses of the socialist parties, the syndi-
calists find themselves in a hopeless minority.* Socialism
is no longer an unembodied project of Marx. It is a
throbbing, moving, struggling force. It is in a daily fight
with the evils of capitalism. It is at work in every strike,
in every great agitation, in every parliament, in every
council. It is a thing of incessant action, whose mistakes
are many and whose failures stand out in relief. Those

* At the Sixth International Conference of the National Trade
Union Centers, held in Paris, 1909, the French syndicalists en-
deavored to persuade the trade unions to hold periodical inter-
national trade-union congresses that would rival the interna-
tional socialist congresses. The proposition was so strongly op-
posed by all countries except France that the motion was with-
drawn.

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 249

who have betrayed it can be pointed out. Those who have
lost all revolutionary fervor and all notion of class can
be held up as a tendency. Those who have fallen into
the traps of the bureaucrats and have given way to the
flattery or to the corruption of the bourgeoisie can be
listed and put upon the index. Even working-class
political action can be assailed as never before, because
it now exists for the first time in history, and its every
weakness is known. Moreover, there are the slowness of
movement and the seemingly increasing tameness of the
multitude. All these incidents in the growth of a vast
movement — ^the rapidity of whose development has
never been equaled in the history of the world — irritate
beyond measure the impatient and ultra-revolutionary ex-
ponents of the new anarchism.

Naturally enough, the criticisms of the syndicalists
are leveled chiefly against political action, parliamentar-
ism, and Statism. It is Professor Arturo Labriola, the
brilliant leader of the Italian syndicalists, who has voiced
perhaps most concretely these strictures against socialism,
although they abound in all syndicalist writings. Ac-
cording to Labriola, the socialist parties have abandoned
Marx. They have left the field of the class struggle,
foresworn revolution, and degenerated into weaklings
and ineffectuals who dare openly neither to advocate
"State socialism" nor to oppose it. In the last chapter
of his "Karl Marx" Labriola traces some of the tenden-
cies to State socialism. He observes that the State is
gradually taking over all the great public utilities and
that cities and towns are increasingly municipalizing pub-
lic services. In the more liberal and democratic coun-
tries "the tendency to State property was greeted," he
says, "as the beginning of the socialist transformation.
To-day, in France, in Italy, and in Austria socialism

250 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

is being confounded with Statism (I'etatisme) . . . The
socialist party, almost ever3rwhere, has become the party
of State capitalism." It is "no more the representa-
tive of a movement which ranges itself against existing
institutions, but rather of an evolution which is taking
place now in the midst of present-day society, and by
means of the State itself. The socialist party, by the
very force of circumstances, is becoming a conservative
party which is declaring for a transformation, the agent
of which is no longer the proletariat itself, but the new
economic organism which is the State. . . . Even the de-
sire of the workingmen themselves to pass into the service
of the State is eager and spontaneous. We have a proof
of it in Italy with the railway workers, who, however,
represent one of the best-informed and most advanced
sections of the working class.

". . . Where the Marxian tradition has no stability,
as in Italy, the socialist party refused to admit that the
State was an exclusively capitalist organism and that it
was necessary to challenge its action. And with this pro-
State attitude of the socialist party all its ideas have un-
consciously changed. The principles of State enterprise
(order, discipline, hierarchy, subordination, maximum
productivity, etc.) are the same as those of private en-
terprise. Wherever the socialist party openly takes its
stand on the side of the State — contrary even to its in-
tentions — it acquires an entirely capitalist viewpoint. Its
embarrassed attitude in regard to the insubordination of
the workers in private manufacture becomes each day
more evident, and, if it were not afraid of losing its
electoral support, it would oppose still more the spirit
of revolt among the workers. It is thus that the socialist
party — the conservative party of the future transformed
State — is becoming the conservative party of the present

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 251

social organization. But even where, as in Germany, the
Marxian tradition still assumes the form of a creed to all
outward appearance, the party is very far from keeping
within the limits of pure Marxian theory. Its anti-State
attitude is not one of inclination. It is imposed by the
State itself, . . . the adversary, through its military and
feudal vanity, of every concession to working-class de-
mocracy." (19)

All this sounds most familiar, and I cannot resist quot-
ing here our old friend Bakounin in order to show how
much this criticism resembles that of the anarchists. If
we turn to "Statism and Anarchy" we find that Bakounin
concluded this work with the following words : "Upon
the Pangermanic banner" (i. e., also upon the banner of
German social democracy, and, consequently, upon the
socialist banner of the whole civilized world) "is in-
scribed : The conservation and strengthening of the State
at all costs; on the socialist-revolutionary banner" (read
Bakouninist banner) "is inscribed in characters of blood,
in letters of fire : the abolition of all States, the destruc-
tion of bourgeois civilization ; free organization from the
bottom to the top, by the help of free associations; the
organization of the working populace (jtc.') freed from
all the trammels, the organization of the whole of emanci-
pated humanity, the creation of a new human world." *
Thus frantically Bakounin exposed the antagonism be-
tween his philosophy and that of the Marxists. It would
seem, therefore, that if Labriola knew his Marx, he
would hardly undertake at this late date to save socialism
from a tendency that Marx himself gave it. The State,
it appears, is the same bugaboo to the syndicalists that
it is to the anarchists. It is almost something personal,
a kind of monster that, in all ages and times, must be

*The comments are by Plechanoff. C20)

252 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

oppressive. It cannot evolve or change its being. It can-
not serve the working class as it has previously served
feudalism, or as it now serves capitalism. It is an un-
changeable thing, that, regardless of economic and social
conditions, must remain eternally the enemy of the peo-
ple.

Evidently, the syndicalist identifies the revolutionist
with the anti-Statist — apparently forgetting that hatred
of the State is often as strong among the bourgeoisie as
among the workers. The determination to limit the
power of the Government was not only a powerful factor
in the French and American Revolutions, but since then
the slaveholders of the Southern States in America, the
factory owners of all countries, and the trusts have ex-
hausted every means, fair and foul, to limit and to
weaken the power of the State. What diflference is there
between the theory of laissez-faire and the antagonism of
the anarchists and the syndicalists to every activity of the
State ? However, it is noteworthy that antagonism to the
State disappears on the part of any group or class as
soon as it becomes an agency for advancing their ma-
terial well-being; they not only then forsake their anti-
Statism, they even become the most ardent defenders
of the State. Evidently, then, it is not the State that
has to be overcome, but the interests that control the
State.

It must be admitted that Labriola sketches accurately
enough the prevailing tendency toward State ownership,
but he misunderstands or wilfully misinterprets, as Ba-
kounin did before him, the attitude of the avowed social-
ist parties toward such evolution. When he declares that
they confuse their socialism with Statism, he might
equally well argue that socialists confuse tiieir socialism
with monopoly or with the aggregation of capital in the

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 253

hands of the few. Because socialists recognize the in-
evitable evolution toward monopoly is no reason for
believing that they advocate monopoly. Nowhere have
the socialists ever advised the destruction of trusts, nor
have they anywhere opposed the taking over of great in-
dustries by the State. They realize that, as- monopoly
is an inevitable outcome of capitalism, so State capitalism,
more or less extended, is an inevitable result of monopoly.
That the workers remain wage earners and are exploited
in the same manner as before has been pointed out again
and again by all the chief socialists. However, if socialists
prefer monopoly to the chaos of competition and to the
reactionary tendencies of small property, and if they
lend themselves, as they do everywhere, to the promo-
tion of the State ownership of monopoly, it is not'be-
. cause they confuse monopoly, whether private or public,
with socialism. It is of little consequence whether the
workers are exploited by the trusts or by the Government.
As long as capitalism exists they will be exploited by the
one or the other. If they themselves prefer to be ex-
ploited by the Government, as Labriola admits, and if
that exploitation is less ruinous to the body and mind
of the worker, the socialist who opposed State capitalism
in favor of private capitalism would be nothing less than
a reactionary.

Without, however, leaving the argument here, it must
be said that there are various reasons why the socialist
prefers State capitalism to private capitalism. It has
certain advantages for the general public. It confers
certain benefits upon the toilers, chief of all perhaps thp
regularity of work. And, abdve and beyond this. State
capitalism is actually expropriating private capitalists.
The more property the State owns, the fewer will be the
number of capitalists to be dealt with, and the easier it

254 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

will be eventually to introduce socialism. Indeed, to
proceed from State capitalism to socialism is little more
than the grasp of public powers by the working class, fol-
lowed by the administrative measures of industrial de-
mocracy. All this, of course, has been said before by
Engels, part of whose argument I have already quoted.
Unfortunately, no syndicalist seems to follow this reason-
ing or excuse what he considers the terrible crime of ex-
tending the domain of the State. Not infrequently his
revolutionary philosophy begins with the abolition of the
State, and often it ends there. Marx, Engels, and Ecca-
rius, as we know, ridiculed Bakounin's terror of the
State ; and how many times since have the socialists been
compelled to deal with this bugaboo ! It rises up in every
country from time to time. The anarchist, the anarchist-
communist, the Lokalisten, the anarcho-socialist, the
young socialist, and the syndicalist have all in their time
solemnly come to warn the working class of this insidious
enemy. But the workers refuse to be frightened, and in
every country, including even Russia, Italy, and France,
they have less fear of State ownership of industry than
they have of that crushing exploitation which they know
to-day.

Even in Germany, where Labriola considers the so-
cialists to be more or less free from the taint of State
capitalism, they have from the very beginning voted
for State ownership. As early as 1870 the German social-
ists, upon a resolution presented by Bebel, adopted by a
large majority the proposition that the State should re-
tain in its hands the State lands. Church lands, communal
lands, the mines, and the railroads.* When adopting the

* It should, however, be pointed out that the German social
democrats voted at first against the State ownership of railroads,
because it was considered a military measure.

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 255

new party program at Erfurt in 1891, the Congress
struck out the section directed against State socialism
and adopted a number of propositions leading to that
end. Again, at Breslau in 1895, the Germans adopted
several State-socialist measures. "At this time," says
Paul Kampffmeyer, "a proposition of the agrarian com-
mission on the party program, which had a decided State-
socialist stamp, was discussed. It contained, among
other things, the retaining and the increase of the public
land domain; the management of the State and com-
munity lands on their own account; the giving of State
credit to cooperative societies ; the socialization of mort-
gages, debts, and loans on land ; the socialization of chat-
tel and real estate insurance, etc. Bebel agreed to all
these State-socialist propositions. He recalled the fact
that the nationalizing of the railroads had been accom-
plished with the agreement of the social-democracy."
(21) "That which applies to the railways applies also
to the forestry," said Bebel. "Have we any objections
to the enlarging of the State forests and thereby the
employment of workers and officials? The same thing
applies to the mines, the salt industry, road-making, the
post office, and the telegraphs. In all of these industries
we have hundreds of thousands of dependent people,
and yet we do not want to advocate their abolition but
rather their extension. In this direction we must break
with all our prejudices. We ought only to oppose State
industry where it is antagonistic to culture and where
it restricts development, as, for instance, is the case in
military matters. Indeed, we must even compel the State
constantly to take over means of culture, because by that
means we will finally put the present State out of joint.
And, lastly, even the strongest State power fails in that
degree in which the State drives its own officers and

256 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

workers into opposition to itself, as has occurred in
the case of the postal service. The attitude which would
refuse to strengthen the power of the State, because this
would entrust to it the solution of the problems of cul-
ture, smacks of the Manchester school. We must strip
off these Manchesterian egg-shells." (22)

Wilhelm Liebknecht also dealt with those who op-
posed the strengthening of the class State. "We are
concerned," he said, ". . . first of all about the strength-
ening of the State power. In all similar cases we have
decided in favor of practical activity. We allowed funds
for the Northeast Sea Canal; we voted for the labor
legislation, although the proposed laws did decidedly ex-
tend the State power. We are in favor of the State
railways, although we have thereby brought about . . .
the dependence of numerous livings upon the State."
(23) As early, indeed, as 1881 Liebknecht saw that the
present State was preparing the way for socialism.
Speaking of the compulspry insurance laws proposed by
Bismarck, he refers to such legislation as embodying
"in a decisive manner the principle of State regulation of
production as opposed to the laissez-faire system of the
Manchester school. The right of the State to regulate
production supposes the duty of the State to. interest it-
self in labor, and State control of the labor of society
leads directly to State organization of the labor of so-
ciety." (24) Further even than this goes Karl Kautsky,
who has been called the "acutest observer and thinker of
modern socialism." "Among the social organizations in
existence to-day," he says, "there is but one that possesses
the requisite dimensions, and may be used as the 'frame-
work for the establishment and development of the
socialist commonwealth, and that is the modern
State." (25)

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 257

Without going needlessly far into this subject, it
seems safe to conclude that the State is no more terri-
fying to the modern socialist than it was to Marx and
Engels. There is not a socialist party in any country
that has not used its power to force the State to under-
take collective enterprise. Indeed, all the immediate
programs of the various socialist parties advocate the
strengthening of the economic power of the State. They
are adding more and more to its functions; they are
broadening its scope; and they are, without question,
vastly increasing its power. But, at the same time, they
are democratizing the State. By direct legislation, by a
variety of political reforms, and by the power of the
great socialist parties themselves, they are really wrest-
ing the control of the State from the hands of special
privilege. Furthermore — and this is something neither
the anarchists nor the syndicalists will see — State social-
ism is in itself undermining and slowly destroying the
class character of the State. According to the view of
Marx, the State is to-day "but a committee for managing
the common affairs of the whole capitalist class." (26)
And it is this because the economic power of the capital-
ist class is supreme. But by the growth of State social-
ism the economic power of the private capitalists is
steadily weakened. The railroads, the mines, the forests,
and other great monopolies are taken out of their hands,
and, to the extent that this happens, their control over
the State itself disappears. Their only power to control
the State is their economic power, and, if that were en-
tirely to disappear, the class character of the State would
disappear also. "The State is not abolished. It dies
out" ; to repeat Engels' notable words. "As soon as there
is no longer any social class to be held in subjection,
. . . nothing more remains to be repressed, and a special

2S8 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

repressive force, a State, is no longer necessary." (27)
The syndicalists are, of course, quite right when they
say that State socialism is an attempt to allay popular
discontent, but they are quite wrong when they accept
this as proof that it must inevitably sidetrack socialism.
They overlook the fact that it is always a concession
granted grudgingly to the growing power of democracy.
It is a point yielded in order to prevent if possible the
necessity of making further concessions. Yet history
shows that each concession necessitates another, and that
State socialism is growing with great rapidity in all
countries where the workers have developed powerful
political organizations. Even now both friends and op-
ponents see in the growth of State socialism the gradual
formation of that transitional stage that leads from
capitalism to socialism. The syndicalist and anarchist
alone fail to see here any drift toward socialism; they
see only a growing tyranny creating a class of favored
civil servants, who are divorced from the actual working
class. At the same time, they point out that the condition
of the toilers for the State has not improved, and that
they are exploited as mercilessly by the State as they
were formerly exploited by the capitalist. To dispute this
would be time ill spent. If it be indeed true, it defeats
the argument of the syndicalist. If the State in its capi-
talism outrageously exploits its servants, tries to pre-
vent them from organizing, and penalizes them for strik-
ing, it will only add to the intensity of the working-class
revolt. It will aid more and more toward creating a
common understanding between the workers for the State
and the workers for the private capitalist. In any case,
it will accelerate the tendency toward the democratiza-
tion of the State and, therefore, toward socialism.
As an alternative to this actual evolution toward social-

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 259

ism, the syndicalists propose to force society to put the
means of production into the hands of the trade unions.
It is perhaps worth pointing out that Owen, Proudhon,
Blanc, Lassalle, and Bakounin all advocated what may
be called "group socialism." (28) This conception of
future society contemplates the ownership of the mines
by the miners, of the railroads by the railway workers,
of the land by the peasants. All the workers in the vari-
ous industries are to be organized into unions and then
brought together in a federation. Several objections are
made to this outline of a new society. In the first place,
it is artificial. Except for an occasional cooperative un-
dertaking, there is not, nor has there ever been, any
tendency toward trade-union ownership of industry. In
addition, it is an idea that is to-day an anachronism. It
is conceivable that small federated groups might control
and conduct countless little industries, but it is not con-
ceivable that groups of "self-governing," "autonomous,"
and "independent" workmen could, or would, be allowed
by a highly industrialized society to direct and manage
such vast enterprises as the trusts have built up. If
each group is to run industry as it pleases, the Standard
Oil workers or the steel workers might menace society
in the future as the owners of those monopolies menace
it in the present. There is no indication in the litera-
ture of the syndicalists, and certainly no promise in a
system of completely autonomous groups of producers,
of any solution of the vast problems of modern trustified
industry. It may be that such ideas corresponded to the
state of things represented in early capitalism. But the
socialist ideas of the present are the product of a more
advanced state of capitalism than Owen, Proudhon, Las-
salle, and Bakounin knew, or than the syndicalists of
France, Italy, and Spain have yet been forced seriously

26o VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

to deal with. Indeed, it was necessary for Marx to
forecast half a century of capitalist development in order
to clarify the program of socialism and to emphasize the
necessity for that program.

It is a noteworthy and rather startling fact that Sidney
and Beatrice Webb had pointed out the economic falla-
cies of syndicalism before the French Confederation of
Labor was founded or Sorel, Berth, and Lagardelle had
written a line on the subject. In their "History of Trade
Unionism" they tell most interestingly the story of
Owen's early trade-union socialism. The book was pub-
lished in 1894, two or three years before the theories
of the French school were born. Nevertheless, their
critique of Owenism expresses as succinctly and forcibly
as anything yet written the attitude of the socialists to-
ward the economics of modern syndicalism. "Of all
Owen's attempts to reduce his socialism to practice,"
write the Webbs, "this was certainly the very worst.
For his short-lived communities there was at least this
excuse: that within their own area they were to be per-
fectly homogeneous little socialist States. There were
to be no conflicting sections, and profit-making and com-
petition were to be effectually eliminated. But in 'the
Trades Union,' as he conceived it, the mere combination
of all the workmen in a trade as cooperative producers
no more abolished commercial competition than a com-
bination of all the employers in it as a joint stock com-
pany. In effect, his Grand Lodges would have been
simply the head offices of huge joint stock companies
owning the entire means of production in their in-
dustry, and subject to no control by the community as a
whole. They would, therefore, have been in a position
at any moment to close their ranks and admit fresh gen-
erations of workers only as employees at competitive

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 261

wages instead of as shareholders, thus creating at one
stroke a new capitalist class and a new proletariat. (29)
... In short, the socialism of Owen led him to propose
a practical scheme which was not even socialistic, and
which, if it could possibly have been carried out, would
have simply arbitrarily redistributed the capital of the
country without altering or superseding the capitalist
system in the least." (30)

Although this "group socialism" would certainly neces-
sitate a Parliament in order to harmonize the conflicting
interests of the various productive associations, there is
nothing, it appears, that the syndicalist so much abhors.
He is never quite done with picturing the burlesque of
parliamentarism. While, no doubt, this is a necessary
corollary to his antagonism to the State, it is aggravated
by the fact that one of the chief ends of a political party
is to put its representatives into Parliament. The syndi-
calist, in ridiculing all parliamentary activity, is at the
same time, therefore, endeavoring to prove the folly of
political action. That you cannot bring into the world
a new social order by merely passing laws is something
the syndicalist never wearies of pointing out. Parlia-
mentarism, he likes to repeat, is a new superstition that
is weakening the activity and paralyzing the mentality of
the working class. "The superstitious belief in parlia-
mentary action," Leone says, ". . . ascribes to acts of
Parliament the magic power of bringing about new social
forces." (31) Sorel refers to the same thing as the
"belief in the magic influence of departmental authority,"

(32) while Labriola divines that "parties may elect mem-
bers of Parliament, but they cannot set one machine go-
ing, nor can they organize one business undertaking."

(33) All this reminds one of what Marx himself said in
the early fifties. He speaks in "Revolution and Counter-

262 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

Revolution," a collection of some articles that were orig-
inally written for the New York Tribune, of "parlia-
mentary cretinism, a disorder which penetrates its un-
fortunate victims with the solemn conviction that the
whole world, its history and future, are governed and
determined by a majority of votes in that particular
representative body which has the honor to count them
among its members, and that all and everything going on
outside the walls of their house — wars, revolutions, rail-
way constructing, colonizing of whole new continents,
California gold discoveries. Central American canals,"
Russian armies, and whatever else may have some little
claim to influence upon the destinies of mankind — is
nothing compared with the incommensurable events hing-
ing upon the important question, whatever it may be,
just at that moment occupying the attention of their
honorable house." (34)

No one can read this statement of Marx's without
realizing its essential truthfulness. But it should not be
forgotten that Marx himself believed, and every prom-
inent socialist believes, that the control of the parliaments
of the world is essential to any movement that seeks to
transform the world. The powerlessness of parliaments
may be easily exaggerated. To say that they are in-
capable of constructive work is to deny innumerable facts
of history. Laws have both set up and destroyed indus-
tries. The action of parliaments has established gigantic
industries. The schools, the roads, the Panama Canal,
and a thousand other great operations known to us to-day
have been set going by parhaments. Tariff laws make
and destroy industries. Prohibition laws have annihilated
industries, while legality, which is the peculiar product
of parliaments, has everything to do with the ownership
of property, of industry, and of the management of capi-

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 263

tal. For one who is attacking a legal status, who is en-
deavoring to alter political, juridical, as well as industrial
and social relations, the conquering of parliaments is
vitally necessary. The socialist recognizes that the par-
liaments of to-day represent class interests, that, indeed,
they are dominated by class interests, and, as such, that
they do not seek to change but to conserve what now
exists. As a result, there is a parliamentary cretinism,
because, in a sense, the dominant elements in Parliament
are only managing the affairs of powerful influences
outside of Parliament. They are not the guiding hand,
but the servile hand, of capitalism.

For the above reason, chiefly, the syndicalists are on
safe ground when they declare that parliaments are cor-
rupt. Corruption is a product of the struggle of the
classes. To obtain special privilege, class laws, and im-
munity from punishment, the "big interests" bribe and
corrupt parliaments. However, corruption does not stop
there. The trade unions themselves suffer. Labor lead-
ers are bought just as labor representatives are bought.
Insurrection itself is often controlled and rendered abor-
tive by corruption. Numberless violent uprisings have
been betrayed by those who fomented them. The words
of Fruneau at Basel in 1869 are memorable. "Bakounin
has declared," he said, "that it is necessary to await the
Revolution. Ah, well, the Revolution! Away with it!
Not that I fear the barricades, but, when one is a
Frenchman and has seen the blood of the bravest of
the French running in the streets in order to elevate
to power the ambitious who, a few months later, sent us
to Cayenne, one suspects the same snares, because the
Revolution, in view of the ignorance of the proletarians,
would take place only at the profit of our adversaries."
(35) There is no way to escape the corrupting power

264 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

of capitalism. It has its representatives in every move-
ment that promises to be hostile. It has its spies in the
labor unions, its agents provocateurs in insurrections;
and its money can always find hands to accept it. One
does not escape corruption by abandoning Parliament.
And Bordat, the anarchist, was the slave of a mania
when he declared: "To send workingmen to a parlia-
ment is to act like a mother who would take her daughter
to a brothel." (36) Parliaments are perhaps more cor-
rupt than trade unions, but that is simply because they
have greater power. To no small degree bribery and
campaign funds are the tribute that capitalism pays to
the power of the State.

The consistent opposition of the syndicalists to the
State is leading them desperately far, and we see them
developing, as the anarchists did before them, a con-
tempt even for democracy. The literature of syndicalism
teems with attacks on democracy. "Syndicalism and
Democracy," says Emile Pouget, "are the two opposite
poles, which exclude and neutralize each other. . . .
Democracy is a social superfluity, a parasitic and exter-
nal excrescence, while syndicalism is the logical mani-
festation of a growth of life, it is a rational cohesion
of human beings, and that is why, instead of restraining
their individuality, it prolongs and develops it." (37)
Democracy is, in the view of Sorel, the regime par ex-
cellence, in which men are governed "by the magical
power of high-sounding words rather than by ideas ; by
formulas rather than by reasons ; by dogmas, the origin
of which nobody cares to find out, rather than by doc-
trines based on observation." (38) Lagardelle declares
that syndicalism is post-democratic. "Democracy corre-
sponds to a definite historical movement," he says, "which
has come to an end. Syndicalism is an anti-democratic

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 265

movement." (39) These are but three out of a number
of criticisms of democracy that might be quoted. Al-
though natural enough as a consequence of syndicalist
antagonism to the State, these ideas are nevertheless fatal
when applied to the actual conduct of a working-class
movement. It means that the minority believes that it
can drive the majority. We remember that Guerard sug-
gested, in his advocacy of the general strike, that, if the
railroad workers struck, many other trades "would be
compelled to quit work." "A daring revolutionary minor-
ity conscious of its aim can carry away with it the
majority." (40) Pouget confesses : "The syndicalist has
a contempt for the vulgar idea of democracy — the inert,
unconscious mass is not to be taken into account when
the minority wishes to act so as to benefit it . . ."
(41) He refers in another place to the majority, who
"may be considered as human zeros. Thus appears the
enormous difference in method," concludes Pouget,
"which distinguishes syndicalism and democracy: the
latter, by the mechanism of universal suffrage, gives
direction to the unconscious . . . and stifles the
minorities who bear within them the hopes of the fu-
ture." (42)

This is anarchism all over again, from Proudhon to
Goldman. (43) But, while the Bakouninists were forced,
as a result of these views, to abandon organized effort,
the newest anarchists have attempted to incorporate these
ideas into the very constitution of the French Confedera-
tion of Labor. And at present they are, in fact, a little
clique that rides on the backs of the organized workers,
and the majority cannot throw them off so long as a score
of members have the same voting power in the Confed-
eration as that of a trade union with ten thousand mem-
bers. All this must, of course, have very serious conse-

266 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

quences. Opposition to majority rule has always been
a cardinal principle of the anarchists. It is also a funda-
mental principle of every American political machine.
To defeat democracy is obviously the chief purpose of a
Tammany Hall. But, when this idea is actually advo-
cated as an ideal of working-class organization, when it
is made to stand as a policy and practice of a trade
union, it can only result in suspicion, disruption, and,
eventually, in complete ruin. It appears that the militant
syndicalist, like the anarchist, realizes that he cannot ex-
pect the aid of the people. He turns, then, to the mi-
nority, the fighting inner circle, as the sole hope.

It is inevitable, therefore, that syndicalism and social-
ism should stand at opposite poles. They are exactly as
far apart as anarchism and socialism.. And, if we turn
to the question of methods, we find an antagonism almost
equally great. How are the workers to obtain possession
of industry? On this point, as well as upon their con-
ception of socialism, the syndicalists are not advanced
beyond Owenism. "One question, and that the most
immediately important of all," say the Webbs, speaking
of Owen's projects, "was never seriously faced: How
was the transfer of the industries from the capitalists to
the unions to be effected in the teeth of a hostile and
well-armed government? The answer must have been
that the overwhelming numbers of 'the trades union'
would render conflict impossible. At all events, Owen,
like the early Christians, habitually spoke as if the day
of judgment of the existing order of society was at hand.
The next six months, in his view, were always going to
see the 'new moral world' really established. The change
from the capitalist system to a complete organization of
industry under voluntary a,ssociations of producers was
to 'come suddenly upon society like a thief in the night.'

I THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 267

. . . It is impossible not to regret that the first intro-
ckiction of the EngHsh Trade Unionist to Sociahsm
should have been effected by a foredoomed scheme which
violated every economic principle of collectivism, and
left the indispensable political preliminaries to pure
chance." (44) Little need be added to what the Webbs
have said on the Utopian features of syndicalism or even
wpon the haphazard method adopted to achieve them.
"No politics in the unions" follows logically enough
from an avowed antagonism to the State. If one starts
with the assumption that nothing can be done through
the State — ^as Owen, Bakounin, and the syndicalists have
done — one is, of course, led irretrievably to oppose parlia-
mentary and other political methods of action.

When the syndicalists throw over democracy and fore-
swear political action, they are fatally driven to the
point where they must abandon the working class. In
the meantime, they are sadly misleading it. It is when
we touch this phase of the syndicalist movement that
we begin to discover real bitterness. Here direct action
stands in opposition to political action. The workers
must choose the one method or the other. The old
clash appears again in all its tempestuous hate. Jules
Guesde was early one of the adherents of Bakounin, but
in all his later life he has been pitiless in his warfare
on the anarchists. As soon, therefore, as the direct-
actionists began again to exercise an influence, Guesde
entered the field of battle. I happened to be at Limoges
in 1906 to hear Guesde speak these memorable words
at the French Socialist Congress : "Political action is
necessarily revolutionary. It does not address itself to
the employer, but to the State, while industrial action
addresses itself to the individual employer or to asso-
ciations of employers. Industrial action does not attack

268 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

the employer as an institution, because the employer is
the effect, the result of capitalist property. As soon as
capitalist property will have disappeared, the employer
will disappear, and not before. It is in the socialist party
— ^because it is a political party — ^that one fights against
the employer class, and that is why the socialist party is
truly an economic party, tending to transform social and
political economy. At the present moment words have
their importance. And I should like to urge the comrades
strongly never to allow it to be believed that trade-
union action is economic action. No ; this latter action is
taken only by the political organization of the working
class. It is the party of the working class which leads
it — ^that is to say, the socialist party — because property is
a social institution which cannot be transformed except
by the exploited class making use of political power for
this purpose. . . .

"I realize," he continued, "that the direct-actionists at-
tempt to identify political action with parliamentary ac-
tion. No ; electoral action as well as parliamentary action
may be forms; pieces of political action. They are not
political action as a whole, which is the effort to seize
public powers — the Government. Political action is the
people of Paris taking possession of the Hotel de Ville in
1 87 1. It is the Parisian workers marching upon the
National Assembly in 1848. ... To those who go
about claiming that political action, as extolled by the
party, reduces itself to the production of public officials,
you will oppose a flat denial. Political action is, more-
over, not the production of laws. It is the grasping by
the working class of the manufactory of laws; it is
the political expropriation of the employer class, which
alone permits its economic expropriation. ... I
wish that someone would explain to me how the break-

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 269

ing of street lights, the disemboweling of soldiers, the
burning of factories, can constitute a means of trans-
forming the ownership of property. . . . Supposing
that the strikers were masters of the streets and should
seize the factories, would not the factories still remain
private property? Instead of being the property of a
few employers or stockholders, they would become the
property of the 500 or the 5,000 workingmen who had
taken them, and that is all. The owners of the property
will have changed ; the system of ownership will have
remained the same. And ought we not to consider it
necessary to say that to the workers over and over
again? Ought we to allow them to take a path that
leads nowhere? . . . No; the socialists could not,
without crime, lend themselves to such trickery. It is
our imperative duty to bring back the workers to reality,
to remind them always that one can only be revolution-
ary if one attacks the government and the State." (45)
"Trade-union action moves within the circle of capital-
ism without breaking through it, and that is necessarily
reformist, in the good sense of the word. In order to
ameliorate the conditions of the victims of capitalist
society, it does not touch the system. All the revolu-
tionary wrangling can avail nothing against this fact.
Even when a strike is triumphant, the day after the
strike the wage earners remain wage earners and capi-
talist exploitation continues. It is a necessity, a fatal-
ity, which trade- union action suffers." (46)

Any comment of mine would, I think, only serve to
mar this masterly logic of Guesde's. There is nothing
perhaps in socialist literature which so ably sustains the
traditional position of the socialist movement. The bat-
tles in France over this question have been bitterly
fought for over half a century. The most brilliant of

270 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

minds have been engaged in the struggle. Proudhon,
Bakounin, Briand, Sorel, Lagardelle, Berth, Herve, are
men of undoubted ability. Opposed to them we find the
Marxists, led in these latter years by Guesde and Jaures.
And while direct action has always been vigorously
supported in France both by the intellectuals and by the
masses, it is the policy of Guesde and Jaures which has
made headway. At the time when the general strike was
looked upon as a revolutionary panacea, and the French
working class seemed on the point of risking every-
thing in one throw of the dice, Jaures uttered a solemn
warning: "Toward this abyss . . . the proletariat
is feeling itself more and more drawn, at the risk not
only of tuining itself should it fall over, but of drag-
ging down 'with it for years to come either the wealth
or the security of the national life." (47) "If the pro-
letarians take possession of the mine and the factory, it
will be a perfectly fictitious ownership. They will be
embracing a corpse, for the mines and factories will
be no better than dead bodies while economic circula-
tion is suspended and production is stopped. So long as
a class does not own and govern the whole social ma-
chine, it can seize a few factories and yards, if it wants
to, but it really possesses nothing. To hold in one's hand
a few pebbles of a deserted road is not to be master
of transportation." (48) "The working class would be
the dupe of a fatal illusion and a sort of unhealthy ob-
session if it mistook what can be only the tactics of
despair for a method of revolution." (49)

The struggle, therefore, between the sjmdicalists and
the socialists is, as we see, the same clash over methods
that occurred in the seventies and ieighties between the
anarchists and the socialists. In abandoning democ-
racy, in denying the efficacy of political action, and in

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM ' 271

resorting to methods which can only end in self-destruc-
tion, the syndicalist becomes the logical descendant of
the anarchist. He is at this moment undergoing an
evolution which appears to be leading him into the same
cul-de-sac that thwarted his forefather. His path is
blocked by the futility of his own weapons. He is
fatally driven, as Plechanoff said, either to serve the
bourgeois politicians or to resort to the tactics of Rava-
chol, Henry, Vaillant, and Most. The latter is the
more likely, since the masses refuse to be drawn into
the general strike as they formerly declined to partici-
pate in artificial uprisings.* The daring conscious mi-
nority more and more despair, and they turn to the
only other weapon in their arsenal, that of sabotage.
There is a kind of fatality which overtakes the revolu-
tionist who insists upon an immediate, universal, and
violent revolution. He must first despair of the major-
ity. He then loses confidence even in the enlightened
minority. And, in the end, like the Bakouninist, he is
driven to individual acts of despair. What will doubt-
less happen at no distant date in France and Italy will
be a repetition of the congress at The Hague. When
the trade-union movement actually develops into a pow-
erful organization, it will be forced to throw off this
incubus of the new anarchism. It is already thought that
a majority of the French trade ■ unionists oppose the
anarchist tendencies of the clique in control, and cer-
tainly a number of the largest and most influential

* The committee on the general strike of the French Confed-
eration said despairingly in igoo: "The idea of the general
strike is sufficiently understood to-day. In repeatedly putting
off the date of its coming, we risk discrediting it forever by
enervating the revolutionary energies." Quoted by Levine, "The
Labor Movement in France," p. 102.

272 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

unions frankly class themselves as reformist syndical-
ists, in order to distinguish themselves from the revolu-
tionary syndicalists. What will come of this division
time only can tell.

In any case, it is becoming clear even to the French
unionists that direct action is not and cannot be, as
Guesde has pointed out, revolutionary action. It can-
not transform our social system. It is destined to fail-
ure just as insurrection as a policy was destined to
failure. Rittinghausen said at Basel in 1869: "Revolu-
tion, as a matter of fact, accomplishes nothing. If you
are not able to formulate, after the revolution, by legisla-
tion, your legitimate demands, the revolution will perish
miserably." (50) This was true in 1848, in 1871, and
even in the great French Revolution itself. Nothing
would have seemed easier at the time of the French
Revolution than for the peasants to have directly pos-
sessed themselves of the land. They were using it. Their
houses were planted in the midst of it. Their land-
lords in many cases had fled. Yet Kropotkin, in his
story of "The Great French Revolution," relates that
the redistribution of land awaited the action of Parlia-
ment. To be sure, some of the peasants had taken the
land, but they were not at all sure that it might not
again be taken from them by some superior force. Their
rights were not defined, and there was such chaos in
the entire situation that, in the end, the whole question
had to be left to Parliament. It was only after the
action of the Convention, June 11, 1793, that the rights
of ownership were defined. It was only then, as Kro-
potkin says, that "everyone had a right to the land.
It was a complete revolution." (51) That the greatest
of living anarchists should be forced to pay this tribute
to the action of Parliament is in itself an assurance.

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 273

For masses in the time of revolution to grab whatever"
they desire is, after all, to constitute what Jaures calls
a fictitious ownership. Some legality is needed to estab-
lish posesssion and a sense of security, and, up to the
present, only the political institutions of society have
been able to do that. For this precise reason every
social struggle and class struggle of the past has been
a political struggle..

There remains but one other fundamental question,
which must be briefly examined. The syndicalists do not
go back to Owen as the founder of their philosophy.
They constantly reiterate the claim that they alone to-
day are Marxists and that it is given to them to keep
"pure and undefiled" the theories of that giant mind.
They base their claim on the ground of Marx's economic
interpretation of history and especia,lly upon his oft-
repeated doctrine that upon the economic structure of
society rises the juridical and political superstructure.
They maintain that the political institutions are merely
the reflex of economic conditions. Alter the economic
basis of society, and the political structure must adjust
itself to the new conditions. As a result of this, truly
Marxian reasoning, they assert that the revolutionary
movement must pursue solely economic aims and disre-
gard totally the existing and, to their minds, superfluous
political relations. They accuse the socialists of a
contradiction. Claiming to be Marxists and basing their
program upon the economic interpretation of history, the
socialists waste their energies in trying to modify the
results instead of obliterating the causes. Political in-
stitutions are parasitical. Why, therefore, ignore eco-
nomic foundations and waste effort remodeling the
parasitical superstructure? There is a contradiction
here, but not on the part of the socialists. Proudhon was

274 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

entirely consistent when he asked: "Can we not ad-
minister our goods, keep our accounts, arrange our dif-
ferences, look after our common interests?" (52) And,
moreover, he was consistent when he declared : "I want
you to make the very institutions which I charge you
to abolish, ... so that the new society shall ap-
pear as the spontaneous, natural, and necessary develop-
ment of the old." (53) If that were once done the
dissolution of government would follow, as he says, in a
way about which one can at present make only guesses.
But Proudhon urged his followers to establish coopera-
tive banks, cooperative industries, and a variety of vol-
untary industrial enterprises, in order eventually to pos-
sess themselves of the means of production. If the
working class, through its own cooperative efforts, could
once acquire the ownership of industry, if they could
thus expropriate the present owners and gradually come
into the ownership, of all natural resources and all means
of production — in a word, of all social capital — they
would not need to bother themselves with the State. If,
in possessing themselves thus of all economic power, they
were .also to neglect the State, its machinery would, of
course, tumble into uselessness and eventually disap-
pear. As the great capitalists to-day make laws through
the stock exchange, through their chambers of com-
merce, through their pools and combinations, so the
working class could do likewise if they were in posses-
sion of industry. But the working class to-day has no
real economic power. It has no participation in the own-
ership of industry. It is claimed that it might withdraw
its labor power and in this manner break down the en-
tire economic system. It is urged that labor alone is abso-
lutely necessary to production and that if, in a great
general strike, it should cease production, the whole of

THE NEWEST ANARCHISM 275

society would be forced to capitulate. And in theory
this seems unassailable, but actually it has no force
whatever. In the first place, this economic power does
not exist unless the workers are organized and are prac-
tically unanimous in their action. Furthermore, the
economic position of the workers is one of utter helpless-
ness at the time of a universal strike, in that they can-
not feed themselves. As they are the nearest of all
classes to starvation, they will be the first to suffer by a
stoppage of work. There is still another vital weakness
in this so-called economic theory. The battles that re-
sult from a general strike will not be on the industrial
field. They will be battles between the armed agents of
the State and unarmed masses of hungry men. What-
ever economic power the workers are said to possess
would, in that case, avail them little, for the results
of their struggles would depend upon the military power
which they would be able to manifest. The individual
worker has no economic power, nor has the minority,
and it may even be questioned if the withdrawal of all
the organized workers could bring society to its knees.
Multitudes of the small propertied classes, of farmers,
of police, of militiamen, and of others would immediately
rush to the defense of society in the time of such peril.
It is only the working class theoretically conceived of as
a conscious unit and as practically unanimous in its
revolutionary aims, in its methods, and in its revolt which
can be considered as the ultimate economic power of
modem society. The day of such a conscious and en-
lightened solidarity is, however, so far distant -that
the syndicalism which is based upon it falls of itself
into a fantastic dream.

CHAPTER XI

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM

It is perhaps just as well to begin this chapter by
reminding ourselves that anarchy means literally no
government. Consequently, there will be no laws. "I
am ready to make terms, but I will have no laws," said
Proudhon; adding, "I acknowledge none." (i) How-
ever revolutionary this may seem, it is, after all, not
so very unlike what has always existed in the affairs of
men. Without the philosophy of the idealist anarchist,
with no pretense of justice or "nonsense" about equality,
there have always been in this old world of ours those
powerful enough to make and to break law, to brush
aside the State and any and every other hindrance that
stood in their path. "Laws are like spiders' webs," said
Anacharsis, "and will, like them, only entangle and hold
the poor and weak, while the rich and powerful will
easily break through them." He might have said, with
equal truth, that, with or without laws, the rich and
powerful have been able in the past to do very much
as they pleased. For the poor and the weak there have
always been, to be sure, hard and fast rules that they
could not break through. But the rich and powerful have
always managed to live more or less above the State or,
at least, so to dominate the State that to all intents and
purposes, other than their own, it did not exist. When
Bakounin wrote his startling and now famous decree
abolishing the State, he created no end of hilarity among

276

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 277

the Marxists, but had Bakounin been Napoleon with
his mighty army, or Morgan and Rockefeller with their
great wealth, he could no doubt in some measure have
carried out his wish. Without, however, either wealth
or numbers behind him, Bakounin preached a polity
that, up to the present, only the rich and powerful have
been able even partly to achieve. The anarchy of Prou-
dhon was visionary, humanitarian, and idealistic. At
least he thought he was striving for a more humane so-
cial order than that of the present. But this older an-
archism is as ancient as tyranny, and never at any mo-
ment has it ceased to menace human civilization. Based
on a real mastery over the industrial and political insti-
tutions of mankind, this actual anarchy has never for
long allowed the law, the Constitution, the State, or the
flag to obstruct its path or thwart its avarice.

Moreover, under the anarchism proposed by Proudhon
and Bakounin, the maintenance of property rights, pviblic
order, and personal security would be left to voluntary
effort, that is to say, to private enterprise. As all things
would be decided by mutual agreement, the only law
would be a law of contracts, and that law would need
to be enforced either by associations formed for that
purpose or by professionals privately employed for that
purpose. So far as one can see, then, the methods of
the feudal lords would be revived, by which they hired
their own personal armies or went shares in the spoils
with their bandits, buccaneers, and assassins. By organ-
izing their own military forces and maintaining them in
comfort, they were able to rob, burn, and murder, in
order to protect the wealth and power they had, or to
gain more wealth and power. For them there was no
law but that of a superior fighting force. There was
an infinite variety of customs and traditions that were

278 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

in the nature of laws, but even these were seldom al-
lowed to stand in the way of those who coveted, and
were strong enough to take, the land, the money, or the
produce of others. Indeed, the feudal duke or prince
was all that Nechayeff claimed for the modern robber.
He was a glorified anarchist, "without phrase, without
rhetoric." He could scour Europe for mercenaries, and,
when he possessed himself of an army of marauders, he
became a law unto himself. The most ancient and hon-
orable anarchy is despotism, and its most effective and
available means of domination have always been the em-
ployment of its own personal military forces.

It will be remembered that Bakounin developed a
kind of robber worship. The bandit leaders Stenka
Razin and Pougatchoff appeared to him as iiational
heroes, popular avengers, and irreconcilable enemies of
the State. He conceived of the brigands scattered
throughout Russia and confined in the prisons of the
Empire as "a unique and indivisible world, strongly
bound together — ^the world of the Russian revolution."
The robber was "the wrestler in life and in death against
all this civilization of officials, of nobles, of priests, and
of the crown." Of course, Bakounin says here much that
is historically true. Thieves, marauders, highwaymen,
bandits, brigands, villains, mendicants, and all those other
elements of mediasval life for whom society provided
neither land nor occupation, often organized themselves
into guerilla bands in order to war upon all social and
civil order. But Bakounin neglects to mention that it
was these very elements that eagerly became the mercen-
aries of any prince who could feed them. They were
lawless, "without phrase, without rhetoric," and, if any-
one were willing to pay them, they would gladly pillage,
burn, and murder in his interest. They would have

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 279

served anybody or anything — the State, society, a prince,
or a tyrant. They had no scruples and no philosophies.
They were in the market to be bought by anyone who
wanted a choice brand of assassins. And the feudal
duke or prince bought, fed, and cared for these "veritable
and unique revolutionists," in order to have them ready
for service in his work of robbery and murder. To
be sure, when these marauders had no employer they
were dangerous, because then they committed crimes and
outrages on their own hook. But the vast majority of
them were hirelings, and many of them achieved fame
for the bravery of their exploits in the service of the
dukes, the princes, and the priests of that time. There
were even guilds of mercenaries, such as the Condottieri
of Italy; and the Swiss were famous for their superior
service. They were, it seems, revolutionists in Bakou-
nin's use of the term, and every prince knew "no money,
no Swiss" ("point d'argent, point de Suisse").

A very slight acquaintance with history teaches us
that this anarchy has been checked and that the history
of recent times consists largely of the struggles of the
masses to harness and subdue this anarchy of the pow-
erful. And perhaps the most notable step in that direction
was that development of the State which took away
the right of the nobles to employ and maintain their
own private armies. In England, policing by the State
began as late as 1826, when Sir Robert Peel passed the
law establishing the Metropolitan force in London, and
these agents of order are even now called "Bobbies" and
"Peelers," in memory of him. Throughout all Europe
the military, naval, and police forces are to-day in the
hands of the State. We have, then, in contradistinction
to the old anarchy, the State maintenance of law and
order, and of protection to life and property. Even in

'28o VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

Russia the coercive forces are under the control of the
Government, and nowhere are individuals — ^be they
Grand Dukes or Princes — allowed to employ their own
military forces. When trouble arises- without, it is the
State that calls together its armed men for aggression
or for defense. When trouble arises within — such as
strikes, riots, and insurrections — it is the State that is
supposed to deal with them. Individuals, no matter how
powerful, are not to-day permitted to organize armies
to invade a foreign land, to subdue its people, and to
wrest from them their property. In the case of upris-
ings within a country, the individual is not allowed to
raise his armies, subdue the troublesome elements, and
make himself master. Within the last few centuries the
State has thus gradually drawn to itself the powers of
repression, of coercion, and of aggression, and it is the
State alone that is to-day allowed to maintain military
forces.

At any rate, this is true of all civilized countries
except the United States. This is the only modern State
wherein coercive military powers are still wielded by in-,
dividu'als. In the United States it is still possible for rich
and powerful individuals or for corporations to employ
their own bands of armed men. If any legislator were
to propose a law allowing any man or group of men to
have their own private battleships and to organize their
own private navies and armies, or if anyone suggested
the turning over of the coercive powers of the State to
private enterprise, the masses would rise in rebellion
against the project. No congressman would, of course,
venture to suggest such a law, and few individuals would
undertake to defend such a plan. Yet the fact is that
now, without legal authority, private armies may be em-
ployed and are indeed actually employed in the United

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 281

States. In the most stealthy and insidious manner there
has grown up within the last fifty years an extensive and
profitable commerce for supplying to the lords of finance
Jheir own private police. And the strange fact appears
'that the newest, and supposedly the least feudal, country
is to-day the only country that allows the oldest anar-
chists to keep in their hands the power to arm their own
mercenaries and,. in the words of an eminent Justice, to
expose "the lives of citizens to the murderous assaults
of hireling assassins." (2) It is with these "hireling
assassins," who, for the convenience of the wealthy, are
now supplied by a great network of agencies, that we
shall chiefly concern ourselves in this chapter. We must
here leave Europe, since it is in the United States alone
that the workings of this barbarous commerce in anarchy
can be observed.

/' Robert A. Pinkerton was the originator of a system of
extra-legal police agents that has gradually grown to be
one of the chief commercial enterprises of the country.
According to his own testimony, (3) he began in 1866
to supply armed men to the owners of large industries,
and ever since his firm has carried on a profitable busi-
ness in that field. Envious of his prosperity, other indi-
viduals have formed rival agencies, and to-day there
exist in the United States thousands of so-called detec-
tive bureaus where armed men can be employed to do
the bidding of any wealthy individual. While, no doubt,
there are agencies that conduct a thoroughly legitimate
business, there are unquestionably numerous agencies in
this country where one may employ thugs, thieves, in-
cendiaries, dynamiters, perjurers, jury-fixers, manufac-
turers of evidence, strike-breakers and murderers. A
regularly established commerce exists, which enables a
rich man, without great difficulty or peril, to hire aban-

282 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

doned criminals, who, for certain prices, will undertake
to execute any crime. If one can afford it, one may have
always at hand a body of highwaymen or a small private
^rmy. Such a commerce as this was no doubt necessary
and proper in the Middle Ages and would no doubt be
necessary and proper in a state of anarchy, but when
/ individuals are allowed to employ private police, armies,
thugs, and assassins in a country which possesses a regu-
larly established State, courts, laws, military forces, and
police the traffic constitutes a menace as alarming as the
Black Hand, the Camorra, or the Mafia. The story of
these hired terrorists and of this ancient anarchy revived
surpasses in cold-blooded criminality any other thing
known in modern history. That rich and powerful
patrons should be allowed to purchase in the market poor
and desperate criminals eager to commit any crime on
i the calendar for a few dollars, is one of the most amaz-
\ing and incredible anachronisms of a too self-complaisant
Republic.

For some reason not wholly obscure the American
people generally have been kept in such ignorance of
the facts of this commerce that few even dream -that
it exists. And I am fully conscious of the need for proof
in support of what to many must appear to be unwar-
ranted assertions. Indeed, it is rare to find anyone who
suspects the character of the private detective. ■ The
general impression seems to- be that he performs a very
useful and necessary service, that the profession is an
honorable one, and that the mass of detectives have only
one ambition in life, and that is to ferret out the crim-
inal and to bring him to justice. To denounce detectives
as a class appears to most persons as absurdly unreason-
able. To speak of them with contempt is to convey the
impression that detectives stand in the way of some evil

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 283

schemes of their detractor. Fiction of a peculiarly
American sort has built up among the people an exalted
conception of the sleuth. And it must appear with
rather a shock to those persons who have thus idealized/
the detective to learn that thousands of men who have
been in the penitentiaries are constantly in the emploi
of the detective agencies. In a society which makes it
almost impossible for an ex-convict to earn an honorable
living it is no wonder that many of them grasp eagerly
at positions offered them as "strike-breakers" and a?
"special officers." The first and most important thing,
then, in this chapter is to prove, with perhaps undue de-
tail, the ancient saying that "you must be a thief to catcll
a thief," and that possibly for that proverbial reason\
many private detectives are schooled and practiced m\
crime. ^— -

So far as I know, the first serious attempt to inform
the general public of the real character of American de-
tectives and to tell of their extensive traffic in criminality
was made by a British detective, who, after having been
stationed in America for several years, was impelled
to make public the alarming conditions which he found.
This was Thomas Beet, the American representative of
the famous John Conquest, ex-Chief Inspector of Scot-
land Yard, who, in a public statement, declared his as-
tonishment that "few . . . recognize in them [de-
tective agencies] an evil which is rapidly becoming a vital
menace to American society. Ostensibly conducted for
the repression and punishment of crime, they are in fact
veritable hotbeds of corruption, trafficking upon the honor
and sacred confidences of their patrons and the credulity
of the public, and leaving in their wake an aftermath of
disgrace, disaster, and even death." (4) He pointed out
the odium that must inevitably attach itself to the very

284 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

name "private detective," unless society awakens and
protects in some manner the honest members of the pro-
fession. "It may seem a sweeping statement," he says,
"but I am morally convinced that fully ninety per cent,
of the private detective establishments, masquerading in
whatever form, are rotten to the core and simply exist
and thrive upon a foundation of dishonesty, deceit, con-
spiracy, and treachery to the public in general and their
own patrons in particular." (5)

The statements of Thomas Beet are, however, not all
of this general character, and he specifically says: "I
know that there are detectives at the head of prominent
agencies in this country whose pictures adorn the rogues'
gallery; men who have served time in various prisons
for almost every crime on the calendar. . . . Thugs
and thieves and criminals don the badge and outward
semblance of the honest private detective in order that
they may prey upon society. . . . Private detectives
such as I have described do not, as a usual thing, go out
to learn facts, but rather to make, at all costs, the evi-
dence desired by the patron." (6) He shows the meth-
ods of trickery and deceit by which these detectives
blackmail the wealthy, and the various means they em-
ploy for convicting any man, no matter how innocent, of
any crime. "We shudder when we hear of the system
of espionage maintained in Russia," he adds, "while in
the great American cities, unnoticed, are organizations of
spies and informers." (7) It is interesting to get the
views of an impartial and expert observer upon this
rapidly growing commerce in espionage, blackmail, and
assault, and no less interesting is the opinion of the most
notable American detective, William J. Burns, on the
character of these men. Speaking of detectives he de-
clared that, "as a class, they are the biggest lot of black-

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 285

mailing thieves that ever went unwhipped of justice." (8)
Only a short time before Burns made this remark the
late Magistrate Henry Steinert, according to reports in
the New York press, grew very indignant in his court
over the shooting of a young lad by these private offi-
cers. "I think it an outrage," he declared, "that the
Police Commissioner is enabled to furnish police power
to these special officers, many of them thugs, men out
of work, some of whom would commit murder for two
dollars. Most of the arrests which have been made by
these men have been absolutely unwarranted. In nearly
every case one of these special officers had first pushed
a gun into the prisoner's face. The shooting last night
when a boy was killed shows the result of giving power
to such men. It is a shame and a disgrace to the Police
Department of the city that such conditions are allowed
to exist." (9)

Anyone who will take the time to search through the
testimony gathered by various governmental commis-
sions will find an abundance of evidence indicating that
many of these special officers and private detectives are
in reality thugs and criminals. As long ago as 1892 anV
inquiry was made into the character of the men who]
were sent to deal with a strike at Homestead, Pennsyl-
vania. A well-known witness testified: "We find that]
one is accused of wife-murder, four of burglary, two of
wife-beating, and one of arson." (10) A thoroughlyj
reliable and responsible detective, who had been in'-tfie
United States secret service, also gave damaging testi-
mony. "They were the scum of the earth. . . . There
is not one out of ten that would not commi^ mur-
der;, that you could not hire him to commit murder
or any other crime." Furthermore, he declared, "I would-,
not believe any detective under oath without his evidence

286 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

was corroborated." He spoke of ex-convicts being em-
ployed, and alleged that the manager of one of the large
agencies "was run out of Cincinnati for blackmail." ( 1 1 )
Similar statements were made by another detective,
named Le Vin, to the Industrial Commission of the
United States when it was investigating the Chicago labor
troubles of 1900. He declared that the Contractors' As-
sociation of Chicago had come to him repeatedly to em-
ploy sluggers, and that on one occasion the employers
had told him to put Winchesters in the hands of his
men and to manage somehow to get into a fight with
the pickets and the strikers. The Commission, evidently
surprised at this testimony, asked Mr. Le Vin whether
it was possible to hire detectives to beat up men. His
answer was: "You cannot hire every man to do it."
"Q. 'But can they hire men ?' A. 'Yes, they could hire
men.'

"Q. 'From other private detective agencies?' A.
'Unfortunately, from some, yes.'" (12)

In the hearing before a Subcommittee of the Commit-
tee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, August 13,
1912, lengthy testimony was given concerning a series^of^
two hundred assaults that had been made upon the union
molders of Milwaukee during a strike in 1906. One of
the leaders of the union was killed, while others were
brutally attacked by thugs in the employ of a Chicago
detective agency. A serious investigation was begun by
Attorney W. B. Rubin, acting for the Molders' "Union,
and in court the evidence clearly proved that the Chicago
detective agency employed ex-convicts and other criminals
for the purposes of slugging, shooting, and even killing
union men. When some of these detectives were ar-
rested they testified that they had acted under strict in-
structions. They had been sent out to beat up certain

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 287

men. Sometimes these men were pointed out to them,
at other times they were given the names of the men that
were to be slugged. They told the amounts that they had
been paid, of the lead pipe, two feet long, which they
had used for the assault, and of the fact that they were
all armed. There was also testimony given that nearly
twenty-two thousand dollars had been paid by one firm to
this one detective agency for services of this character.
It was also shown that immediately after the assaults
were committed the thugs were, if possible, shipped out
of town for a few days; but, if they were arrested,
they were defended by able attorneys and their fines
paid. Although many assaults were committed where
no arrests could be made, over forty "detectives" were
actually arrested, and, when brought into court, were
found guilty of crimes ranging from disturbing the peace
and carrying concealed weapons to aggravated assault
and shooting with intent to kill. Many of these detec-
tives convicted in Milwaukee had been previously con-
victed of similar crimes committed in other cities. Al-
though some of them had long criminal records, they
were, nevertheless, regularly in the employ of the detec-
tive agency. It appeared in one trial that one of the men
employed was very much incensed when he saw three of
his associates attack a union molder with clubs, knock-
ing him down and beating him severely. With indigna-
tion he protested against the outrage. When the head
of the agency heard of this the man was discharged.
The court records also show that the head of the detec-
tive agency had gone himself tp Chicago to secure two
men to undertake what proved to be a fatal assault upon
a trade-union leader named Peter J. Cramer. When
arrested and brought into court they testified that they
received twenty dollars per day for their services.

288 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

Equally direct and positive evidence concerning the
character of the men supplied by detective agencies for
strike-breaking and other purposes is found in the annual
report of the Chicago & Great Western Railway for the
period ending in the spring of the year 1908. "To man
the shops and roundhouses," says the report, "the com-
pany was compelled to resort to professional strike-
breakers, a class of men who are willing to work during
the excitement and dangers of personal injury which at-
tend strikes, but who refuse to work longer than the
excitement and dangers last. . . . Perhaps ten per
cent, of the first lot of strike-breakers were fairly good
mechanics, but fully 90 per cent, knew nothing about
machinery, and had to be gotten rid of. To get rid of
such men, however, is easier said than done.

"The first batch which was discharged, consisting of
about 100 men, refused to leave the barricade, made
themselves a barricade within the company's barricade,
and, producing guns and knives, refused to budge. The
company's fighting men, after a day or two, forced them
out of the barricade and into a special train, which car-
ried them under guard to Chicago." Here was one gang
of hired criniinals, "the company's fighting men," called
into service to fight another gang, the company's strike-
breakers. The character of these "detectives," as testified
to in this case by the employers, appears to have been
about the same as that of those described by "Kid" Ho-
gan, who, after an experience as a strike-breaker, told
the New York Sunday World: "There was the finest
bunch of crooks and grafters working as strike-breakers
in those American Express Company strikes you would
ever want to see. I was one of 'em and know what I
am talking about. That gang of grafters cost the Express
Company a pile of money. Why, they used to start

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 289

trouble themselves just to keep their jobs a-going and to
get a chance to swipe stuff off the wagons.

"It was the same way down at Philadelphia on the
street car strike. Those strike-breakers used to get a
car out somewhere in the suburbs and then get off and
smash up the windows, tip the car over, and put up an
awful holler about being attacked by strikers, just so
they'd have to be kept on the job." (13)

Thus we see that some American "detective" agencies
have many and varied trades. But they not only sup-
ply strike-breakers, perjurers, spies, and even assassins,
they have also been successful in making an utter farce
of trial by jury. It appears that even some of the best
known American detectives are not above the packing
of a jury. At least, such was the startling charge made
by Attorney-General George W. Wickersham, May 10,
1912. In the report to President Taft Mr. Wickersham
accused the head of one of the chief detective agencies
of the country of fixing a jury in California. The agents
of this detective, with the cooperation of the clerk of the
court, investigated the names of proposed jurors. In
order to be sure of getting a jury that would convict,
the record of each individual was carefully gone into
and a report handed to the prosecuting attorneys. Some
of the comments on the jurors follow : "Convictor
from the word go." "Socialist. Anti-Mitchell." "Con-
victor from the word go ; just read the indictment. Pop-
ulist." "Think he is a Populist. If so, convictor. Good,
reliable man." "Convictor. Democrat. Hates Her-
mann." "Hidebound Democrat. Not apt to see any good
in a Republican." "Would be apt to be for conviction."
"He is apt to wish Mitchell hung. Think he would be
a fair .juror." "Would be likely to convict any Republi-
can politician." "Convictor." "Would convict Christ."

290

VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

"Convict Christ. Populist." "Convict anyone. Demo- 1
crat." (14) This great detective even had the audacity,
it seems, to telegraph William Scott Smith, at that time
secretary to the Hon. E. A. Hitchcock, the Secretary of
the Interior: "Jury commissioners cleaned out old box I
from which trial jurors were selected and put in 600
names, every one of which was investigated before they
were placed in the box. This confidential." (15) It is^
impossible to reproduce here some of the language of
this great detective. The foul manner in which he
comments upon the character of the jurors is altogether
worthy of his vocation. That, however, is unimportant
compared to the more serious fact that a well-paid de-
tective can so pervert trial by jury that it would "con-
vict Christ."

I shall be excused in a matter so devastating to re-
publican institutions as this if I quote further from the
disclosures of Thomas Beet : "There is another phase,"
he says, "of the private detective evil which has worked
untold damage in America. This is the private con-
stabulary system by which armed forces are employed
during labor troubles. It is a condition akin to the feudal
system of warfare, when private interests can employ
troops of mercenaries to wage war at their command.
Ostensibly, these armed private detectives are hurried to
the scene of the trouble to maintain order and prevent
destruction of property, although this work always should
be left to the official guardians of the peace. That there
is a sinister motive back of the employment of these men
has been shown time and again. Have you ever followed
the episodes of a great strike and noticed that most of
the disorderly outbreaks were so guided as to work harm
to the interests of the strikers? . . . Private detec-
tives, unsuspected in their guise of workmen, mingle

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 291

with the strikers and by incendiary talk or action some-
times stir them up to violence. When the workmen will
not participate, it is an easy matter to stir up the dis-
orderly faction which is invariably attracted by a strike,
although it has no connection therewith.
-^ "During a famous strike of car builders in a western
city some years ago, ... to my knowledge much
of the lawlessness was incited by private detectives, who
led mobs in the destruction of property. In one of the
greatest of our strikes, that involving the steel industry,
over two thousand armed detectives were employed sup-
posedly to protect property, while several hundred more
were scattered in the ranks of strikers as workmen.
Many of the latter became officers in the labor bodies,
helped to make laws for the organizations, made incen-
diary speeches, cast their votes for the most radical
movements made by the strikers, participated in and led
bodies of the members in the acts of lawlessness that
eventually caused the sending of State troops and the
declaration of martial law. While doing this, these spies
within the ranks were making daily reports of the plans
and purposes of the strikers. To my knowledge, when
lawlessness was at its height and murder ran riot, these
men wore little patches of white on the lapels of their
coats that their fellow detectives of the 'two thousand'
would not shoot them down by mistake. . . . In no
other country in the world, with the exception of China,
is it possible for an individual to surround himself with
a standing army to do his bidding in defiance of law and
order." (16)

That the assertions of Thomas Beet are well founded
can, I think, be made perfectly clear by three tragic pe-
riods in the history of labor disputes in America. At
Homestead in 1892, in the railway strikes of 1894, and

292 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

in Colorado during the labor wars of 1903- 1904 detectives
were employed on a large scale. For reasons of space I
shall limit myself largely to these cases, which, without
exaggeration, are typical of conditions which constantly
arise in the United States. Within the last year West
Virginia has been added to the list. Incredible outrages
have been committed there by the mine guards. They
have deliberately murdered men in some cases, and, on
one dark night in February last, they sent an armored
train into Holly Grove and opened fire with machine guns
upon a sleeping village of miners. They have beaten,
clubbed, and stabbed men and women in the effort either
to infuriate them into open war, or to reduce them to
abject slavery. Unfortunately, at this time the complete
report of the Senate investigation has not been issued,
and it seems better to confine these pages to those facts
only that careful inquiry has proved unquestionable. We
are fortunate in having the reports of public officials —
certainly unbiased on the side of labor — ^to rely upon
for the facts concerning the use of thugs and hirelings
in Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Colorado during three ter-
rible battles between capital and labor. ~_^
The story of the shooting of Henry C. Frick by Alex- '
ander Berkman is briefly referred to in the first chapter,
but the events which led up to that shooting have well-
nigh been forgotten. Certainly, nothing could have
created more bitterness among the working classes than
the act of the Carnegie Steel Company when it ordered
a detective agency to send to Homestead three hundred
men armed with Winchester rifles. There was the pros-
pect of a strike, and it appears that the management
was in no mood to parley with its employees, and that
nineteen days before any trouble occurred the Carnegie
Steel Company opened negotiations for the employment

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 293

of a private army. It had been the custom of the Carne-
gie Company to meet the representatives of the Almaga-
mated Association of Iron and Steel Workers from time
to time and at these conferences to agree upon wages.
On June 30, 1892, the agreement expired, and previous
to that date the Company announced a reduction of
wages, declaring that the new scale would terminate in
January instead of June. The employees rejected the
proposed terms, principally on the ground that they could
not afford to strike in midwinter and in that case they
would not be able to resist a further reduction in wages.
Upon receiving this statement the company locked out its
employees and the battle began.

The steel works were surrounded by a fence three
miles long, fifteen feet in height, and covered with barbed
wire. It was called "Fort Frick," and the three hundred
detectives were to be brought down the river by boat and
landed in the fort. Morris Hillquit gives the following
account of the pitched battle that occurred in the early
morning hours of July 6 : "As soon as the boat carrying
the Pinkertons was sighted by the pickets the alarm was
sounded. The strikers were aroused from their sleep
and within a few minutes the river front was covered
with a crowd of coatless and hatless men armed with
guns and rifles and grimly determined to prevent the
landing of the Pinkertons. The latter, however, did not
seem to appreciate the gravity of the situation. They
sought to intimidate the strikers by assuming a threat-
ening attitude and aiming the muzzles of their shining
revolvers at them. A moment of intense expectation
followed. Then a shot was fired from the boat and one
of the strikers fell to the ground mortally wounded. A
howl of fury and a volley of bullets came back from the
line of the strikers, and a wild fusillade was opened on

294 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

both sides. In vain did the strike leaders attempt to
pacify the men and to stop the carnage — ^the strikers
were beyond control. The struggle lasted several hours,
after which the Pirikertons retreated from the river bank
and withdrew to the cabin of the boat. There they re-
mained in the sweltering heat of the July sun without
air or ventilation, under the continuing fire of the en-
raged men on the shore, until they finally surrendered.
They were imprisoned by the strikers in a rink, and in
the evening they were sent out of town by rail. The
number of dead on both sides was twelve, and over
twenty were seriously wounded." (17)

These events aroused the entire country, and the state
of mind among the working people generally was exceed-
ingly bitter. It was a tension that under certain circum-
stances might have provoked a civil war. Both the
Senate and the House of Representatives immediately
appointed committees to inquire into this movement from
state to state of armed men, and the employment by
corporations of what amounted to a private army. It
seems to have been clearly established that the employers
wanted war, and that the attorney of the Carnegie Com-
pany had commanded the local sheriff to deputize a man
named Gray, who was to meet the mercenaries and make
all of them deputy sheriffs. This plan to make the
detectives "legal" assassins did not carry, and the result
was that a band of paid thugs, thieves, and murderers
invaded Homestead and precipitated a bloody conflict.
This was, of course, infamous, and, compared with its
magnificent anarchy, Berkman's assault was child-like in
its simplicity. Yet the enthusiastic and idealistic Berk-
man spent seventeen years in prison and is still ab-
horred; while no one responsible for the murder of
twelve workingmen and the wounding of twenty others,

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 295

either among the mercenaries or their employers, has
yet been apprehended or convicted. With such equality
of jjistice do we treat these agents of the two anarchies !
However, if Berkman spent seventeen years in prison,
the other anarchists were mildly rebuked by the Commit-
tee of Investigation appointed by the Senate. "Your
committee is of the opinion," runs the report, "that the
employment of the private armed guards at Homestead
was unnecessary. There is no evidence to show that the
slightest damage was done, or attempted to be done, to
property on the part of the strikers. . . ." (18)
"It was claimed by the Pinkerton agency that in all cases
they require that their men shall be sworn in as deputy
sheriffs, but it is a significant circumstance that in the
only strike your committee made inquiry concerning —
that at Homestead — ^the fact was admitted on all hands
that the armed men supplied by the Pinkertons were not
so sworn, and that as private citizens acting under the
direction of such of their own men as were in command
they fired upon the people of Homestead, killing and
wounding a number." (19) "Every man who testified,
including the proprietors of the detective agencies, ad-
mitted that the workmen are strongly prejudiced against
the so-called Pinkertons, and that their presence at a
strike serves to unduly inflame the passions of the strik-
ers. The prejudice against them arises partly from the
fact that they are frequently placed among workmen, in
the disguise of mechanics, to report alleged conversations
to their agencies, which, in turn, is transmitted to the
employers of labor. Your committee is impressed with
the belief that this is an utterly vicious system, and that
it is responsible for much of the ill-feeling and bad blood
displayed by the working classes. No self-respecting
laborer or mechanic likes to feel that the man beside

296 .VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

him may be a spy from a detective agency, and espe-
cially so when the laboring man is utterly at the mercy
of the detective, who can report whatever he plea.ses,
be it true or false. . . . (20) Whether assumedly
legal or not, the employment of armed bodies of
men for private purposes, either by employers or em-
ployees, is to be deprecated and should not be resorted to.
Such use of private armed men is an assumption of the
State's authority by private citizens. If the State is
incapable of protecting citizens in their rights of person
and property, then anarchy is the result, and the original
law of force should neither be approved, encouraged, nor
tolerated until all known legal processes have failed."

(21)

We must leave this black page in American history
with such comfort as we can wring from the fact that
the modern exponents of the oldest anarchy have been
at least once rebuked, and with the further satisfaction
that the Homestead tragedy brought momentarily to the
attention of the entire nation a practice which even at
that time was a source of great alarm to many serious
men. In the great strikes which occurred in the late
eighties and early nineties there was a great deal of vio>
lence, and C. H. Salmons, in his history of "The Bur-
lington Strike" of 1888, relates how private detectives
systematically planned outrages that destroyed property
and how others committed murder. A few cases were
fought out in the courts with results very disconcerting
to the railroads who had hired thesfe private detectivesx
In the strike on the New York Central Railroad wtjich-.
occurred in 1890 many detectives were employed. They]
were, of course, armed, and, as a result of certain crim-
inal operations undertaken by them, Congress was asked
to consider the drafting of a bill "to prevent corpora-

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 297

tions engaged in interstate-commerce traffic from employ-
ing unjustifiably large bodies of armed men denominated
'detectives,' but clothed with no legal functions." (22)
Roger A. Pryor, then Justice of the Supreme Court of
New York, vigorously protested against these "watch-
men." "I mean," he said, "the enlistment of banded
and armed mercenaries under the command of private
detectives on the side of corporations in their conflicts
with employees. The pretext for such an extraordinary
measure is the protection of the corporate property ; and
surely the power of this great State is adequate to the
preservation of the public order and security. At all
events, in this particular instance, it was not pretended
either that the strikers had invaded property or person,
or that the police or militia in Albany had betrayed re-
luctance or inability to cope with the situation. On the
contrary, the facts are undisputed that the moment the
men went out Mr. Pinkerton and his myrmidons ap-
peared on the scene, and the police of Albany declared
their competency to repel any trespass on person or
property. The executive of the State, too, denied any
necessity for the presence of the military.

"I do not impute to the railroad officials a purpose,
without provocation, to precipitate their ruffians upon a
defenseless and harmless throng of spectators; but the
fact remains that the ruffians in their hire did shoot into
the crowd without occasion, and did so shed innocent
blood. And it is enough to condemn the system that it
authorizes unofficial and irresponsible persons to usurp
the most delicate and difficult functions of the State and
exposes the lives of citizens to the murderous assaults
of hireling assassins, stimulated to violence by panic or
by the suggestion of employers to strike terror by an
appalling exhibition of force. If the railroad company

298 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

may enlist armed men to defend its property, the em-
ployees may enlist armed men to defend their persons,
and thus private war be inaugurated, the authority of
the State defied, the peace and tranquillity of society de-
stroyed, and the citizens exposed to the hazard of indis-
criminate slaughter." (23) »—

Perhaps the^ most extensive use of these so-called de-
tectives was at the time of the great railway strike of
1894. The strike of the workers at Pullman led to a
general sympathetic strike on all the railroads entering
Chicago, and from May 11 to July 13 there was waged
one of the greatest industrial battles in American history.
A railway strike is always a serious matter, and in a
short time the Government came to the active support of
the railroads. At one time over fourteen thousand sol-
diers, deputy marshals, deputy sheriffs, and policemen
were on duty in Chicago. During the period of the
strike twelve persons were shot and fatally wounded.
A number of riots occurred, cars were burned, and, as a
result of the disturbances, no less than seven hundred
persons were arrested, accused of murder, arson, burglary,
assault, intimidation, riot, and other crimes. The most -
accurate information we have concerning conditions in
Chicago during the strike is to be found in the evidence
which was taken by the United States Strike Commission
appointed by President Cleveland July 26, 1894. There
seems to be no doubt that during the early days of the
strike perfect peace reigned in Chicago. At the very be-
ginning of the trouble three hundred strikers were de-
tailed by the unions to guard the property of the Pull-
man company from any interference or destruction. "It
is in evidence, and uncontradicted," reports the Commis-
sion, "that no violence or destruction of property by
strikers or sympathizers took place at Pullman." (24)

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 299

It also appears that no violence occurred in Chicago in
connection with the strike until after several thousand
men were made United States deputy marshals. These
"United States deputy marshals." says the Commission,
"to the number of 3,600, were selected by and appointed
at the request of the General Managers' Association, and
of its railroads. They, were armed and paid by the rail-
roads." (25) In other words, the United States Govern-
ment gave over its police power directly into the hands
of one of the combatants. It allowed these private com-
panies, through detective agencies, to collect as hastily as
possible a great body of unemployed, to arm them, and
to send them out as officials of the United States to do
whatsoever was desired by the railroads. They were not
under the control of the army or of responsible United
States officials, and their intrusion into a situation so
tense and critical as that then existing in Chicago' was
certain to produce trouble. And the fact is, the lawless-
ness that prevailed in Chicago during that strike began
only after the appearance of these private "detectives."
It will astonish the ordinary American citizen to read
of the character of the men to whom the maintenance of
law and order was entrusted. Superintendent of Police
Brennan referred to these deputy marshals in an official
report to the Council of Chicago as "thugs, thieves, and
ex-convicts," and in his testimony before the Commission
itself he said: "Some of the deputy marshals who are
now over in the county jail . . . were arrested while
deputy marshals for highway robbery." (26) Several
newspaper men, when asked to testify regarding the char-
acter of these United States deputies, referred to them
variously as "drunkards," "loafers," "bums," and "crim-
inals." The now well-known journalist, Ray Stannard
Baker, was at that time reporting the strike for the Chi-

300 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

cago Record. He was asked by Commissioner Carroll
D. Wright as to the character of the United States deputy
marshals. His answer was : "From my experience with
them I think it was very bad indeed. I saw more cases
of drunkenness, I believe, among the United States dep-
uty marshals than I did among the strikers." (27) Ben-
jamin H. Atwell, reporter for the Chicago News, testi-
fied: "Many of the marshals were men I had known
around Chicago as saloon characters. . . . The first
day, I believe, after the troops arrived . . . the dep-
uty marshals went up into town and some of them got
pretty drunk." (28) Malcomb McDowell, reporter for
the Chicago Record, testified that the deputy marshals
and deputy sheriffs "were not the class of men who ought
to be made deputy marshals or deputy sheriffs. . . .
They seemed to be hunting trouble all the time. . . .
At one time a serious row nearly resulted because some
of the deputy marshals standing on the railroad track
jeered at the women that passed and insulted them.
. . . I saw more deputy sheriffs and deputy marshals
drunk than I saw strikers drunk." (29) Harold I. Cleve-
land, reporter for the Chicago Herald, testified: "I was
. . . on the Western Indiana tracks for fourteen days
. . . and I suppose I saw in that time a couple of
I hundred deputy marshals. ... I think they were a
\ very low, contemptible set of men." (30)
V In Mr. Baker's testimony he speaks of seeing in one
of the riots "a big, rough-looking fellow, whom the people
called 'Pat.'" (31) He was the leader of the mob, and
when the riot was over, "he mounted a beer keg in front
of one of the saloons and advised men to go home, get
their guns, and come out and fight the troops, fire on
them. . . . The same man appeared two nights later
at Whiting, Indiana, and made quite a disturbance there,

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 301

roused the people up. In all that mob that had hold of
the ropes I do not think there were many American Rail-
way Union men. I think they were mostly roughs from
Chicago. . . . The police knew well enough all about
this man I have mentioned who was the ringleader of the
mob, but they did nothing and the deputy marshals were
not any better." (32) For some inscrutable reason, cer-
tain men, none of whom were railroad employees, were
allowed openly to provoke violence. Fortunately, how-
ever, they were not able to induce the actual strikers to
participate in their assaults upon railroad property, and
every newspaper man testified that the riots were, in the
main, the work of the vicious elements of Chicago. They
were, said one witness, "all loafers, idlers, a petty class
of criminals well known to the police." (33) Malcomb
McDowell testified concerning one riot which he had
reported for the papers: "The men did not look like
railroad men. . . . Most of them were foreigners,
and one of the men in the crowd told me afterward that
he was a detective from St. Louis. He gave me the name
of the agency at the time." (34)

Mr. Eugene V. Debs, the leader of that great strike,
in a pamphlet entitled The Federal Government and the
Chicago Strike, calls particular attention to the following
declaration of the United States Strike Commission:
"There is no evidence before the Commission that the
officers of the American Railway Union at any time par-
ticipated in or advised intimidation, violence or destruc-
tion of property. They knew and fully appreciated that,
as soon as mobs ruled, the organized forces of society
would crush the mobs and all responsible for them in the
remotest degree, and that this means defeat." (35) Cont
menting upon this statement, Mr. Debs asks : "To whose ■,
interest was it to have riots and fires, lawlessness andf

302 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

irime ? To whose advantage was it to have disreputable
/deputies' do these things ? Why were only freight cars,
largely hospital wrecks, set on fire? Why have the rail-
roads not yet recovered damages from Cook County,
Illinois, for failing to protect their property? . . .
The riots and incendiarism turned defeat into victory
for the railroads. They could have won in no other
way. They had ever)rthing to gain and the strikers every-
thing to lose. The violence was instigated in spite of
the strikers, and the report of the Commission proves
that they made every eifort in their power to preserve
the peace." (36)

This history is important in a study of the extensive
system of subsidized violence that has grown up in
America. Nearly every witness before the Commission
testified that the strikers again and again gave the police
valuable assistance in protecting the property of the
railroads. No testimony was given that the workingmen
advocated violence or that union men assisted in the riots.
The ringleaders of all the serious outbreaks were notori-
ous toughs from Chicago's vicious sections, and they
were allowed to go for days unmolested by the deputy
marshals — who, although representatives of the United
States Government, were in the pay of the railroads.
In fact, the evidence all points to the one conclusion, that
the deputy marshals encouraged the violence of ruffians
and tried to provoke the violence of decent men by in-
sulting, drunken, and disreputable conduct. The strikers
realized that violence was fatal to their cause, and the
deputy marshals knew that violence meant victory for
the railroads. And that proved to be the case. 1_

Before leaving this phase of anarchy I want to refer
as briefly as possible to that series of fiercely fought
political and industrial battles that occurred in Colorado

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 303

^n the period from 1894 to 1904. The climax of the
long-drawn-out battles there was perhaps the most un-
adulterated anarchy that has yet been seen in America.
It was a terrorism of powerful and influential anarchists
who frankly and brutally answered those who protested
against their many violations of the United States Con-
_stitution: "To hell with the Constitution!" (37) The
story of these Colorado battles is told in a report of an in-
vestigation made by the United States Commissioner of
Labor (1905). The reading of that report leaves one
with the impression that present-day society rests upon
a volcano, which in favorable periods seems very harm-'
less indeed, but, when certain elemental forces clash, it
bursts forth in a manner that threatens with destruction
civilization itself. The trouble in Colorado began with '
the effort on the part of the miners' union to obtain
through the legislature a law limiting the day's work
to eight hours in all underground mines and in all work
for reducing and refining ores. That was in 1894. The
next year an eight-hour bill was presented in the legis-
lature. Expressing fear that such a bill might be un-
constitutional, the legislature, before acting upon it, asked
the Supreme Court to render a decision. The Supreme
Court replied that, in its opinion, such a bill would be
unconstitutional. In 1899, as a result of further agita-
tion by the miners, an eight-hour law was enacted by
the legislature — a large majority in both houses voting
for the bill. By unanimous decision the same year the
Supreme Court of Colorado declared the statute uncon-
stitutional. The miners were not, however, discouraged,
and they began a movement to secure the adoption of a
constitutional amendment which would provide for the
enactment of an eight-hour law. All the political parties
in the State of Colorado pledged themselves in convention

504 ViOLE^fCE AND THE LaIBOR MOVEMENT
!
to support such a measure. In the general election of

1902 the constitutional amendment providing for an
feight-hour day was adopted by the people of the State
/by 72,980 votes against 26,266. This wras a great vic-
tory for the miners, and it seemed as if their work was
done. According to all the traditions and pretensions of
political life, they had every reason to believe that the
next session of the legislature would pass an eight-hour
law. It appears, however, that the corporations had de-
termined at all cost to defeat such a bill. They set out"
therefore to corrupt wholesale the legislature, and as a
result the eight-hour bill was defeated. After having
done everything in their power, patiently, peacefully, and
legally to obtain their law, and only after having been
outrageously betrayed by corrupt public servants, the
miners as a last resort, on the 3d of July, 1903, declared a
strike to secure through their own efforts what a decade
of pleading and prayers had failed to achieve. —

I suppose no unbiased observer would to-day question
that the political machines of Colorado had sold them-
selves body and soul to the mine owners. There can
surely be no other explanation for their violation of i
their pledges to the people and to the miners. An,d_-
further evidence of their perfidy was given on the night
of September 3, 1903, at a conference between some of
the State officials and certain officers of the Mine Own-
ers' Association. Although the strike up to this time
had been conducted without any violence, the State of-
ficials agreed that the mine owners could have the aid
of the militia, provided they would pay the expenses of
the soldiers while they remained in the strike district.
Two days later over one thousand men were encamped in
Cripple Creek. All the strike districts were at once put
under martial law ; the duly elected officials of the people

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM yog

were commanded to resign from office ; hundreds of un-
offending citizens were arrested and thrown into "bull
pens"; the whole working force of a newspaper was
apprehended and taken to the "bull pen"; all the news
that went out concerning the strike was censored, the
manager of one of the mines acting as official censor.
At the same time this man, together with other mine
managers and friends, organized mobs to terrorize union
miners and to force out of town anyone whom they
thought to be in sympathy with the strikers.

In the effort to determine whether the courts or the
military powers were supreme, a writ of habeas corpus
was obtained for four men who had been sent by the
military authorities to the "bull pen." The court sent
an order to produce the men. Ninety cavalrymen were
then sent to the court house. They surrounded it, per-
mitting no person to pass through the lines unless he was
an officer of the court, a member of the bar, a county
official, or a press representative. A company of in-
fantrymen then escorted the four prisoners to the court,
while fourteen soldiers with loaded guns and fixed bay-
onets guarded the prisoners until the court was called to
order. When the court was adjourned, after an argu-
ment upon the motion to quash the return of the writ,
the soldiers took the prisoners back to the "bull pen."
The next day Judge Seeds was forced to adjourn the
court, because the prisoners were not present. An officer
of the militia was ordered to have them in court at two
o'clock in the afternoon, but, as they did not appear at
that time, a continuance was granted until the following
day. On September 23 a large number of soldiers, cav-
alry and infantry, surrounded the court house. A Gatling
gun was placed in position nearby, and a detail of sharp-
shooters was stationed where they could command the

306 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

streets. The court, in the face of this military display,
cited the Constitution of Colorado, which declares that
the military shall always be in strict subordination to the
civil power, and pointed out that this did not specify
sometimes but always, declaring: "There could be no
plainer statement that the military should never be per-
mitted to rise superior to the civil power within the limits
of Colorado." (38) The judge then ordered the military
authorities to release the prisoners, but this they refused
to do. __

At Victor certain mine owners commanded the sheriff
to come to their club rooms, where his resignation was
demanded. When he refused to resign, guns were pro-
duced, a coiled rope was dangled before him, and on
the outside several shots were fired. He was told that
unless he resigned the mob outside the building would
be admitted and he would be taken out and hanged. He
then signed a written resignation, and a member of the
Mine Owners' Association was appointed sheriff. With ,
this new sheriff in charge, the mine owners, mine man-
agers, and all they could employ for the purpose arrested
on all hands everybody that seemed unfriendly to their
anarchy. The new sheriff and a militia officer com--
manded the Portland mine, which was then having no
trouble with its employees, to shut down. By this order
four hundred and seventy-five men were thrown out of
employment. In these various ways the mobs organized
by the mine owners were allowed to obliterate the Gov-
ernment and abolish republican institutions, under the
immediate protection of their leased military forces.

At Telluride, also, the military overpowered the civil
authorities. When Judge Theron Stevens came there to
hold the regular session of court he was met by soldiers
and a mob of three hundred persons. Seeing that it

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 307

was impossible for the civil authorities to exercise any
power, he decided to adjourn the court until the next
term, declaring: "The demonstration at the depot last
night upon the arrival of the train could only have been
planned and executed for the purpose of showing the
contempt of the militia and a certain portion of this com-
munity for the civil authority of the State and the civil
authority of this district. I had always been led to sup-
pose from such research as I have been able to make
that in a republic like ours the people were supreme;
that the people had expressed their will in a constitution
which was enacted for the government of all in authority
in this State. That constitution provides that the mili-
tary shall always be in strict subordination to the civiU
authorities." (39) ' ]

While this terrorism of the powerful was in full swayi
in Colorado, the entire world was being told through 1
the newspapers of the infamous crimes being com-
mitted daily by the Western Federation of Miners.
Countless newspaper stories were sent out telling in de-
tail of mines blown up, of trains wrecked, of men mur- ;
dered through agents of this federation of toilers en-
gaged day in and day out at a dangerous occupation in
the bowels of the earth. Not loafers, idlers, or drunk"^
ards, but men with calloused hands and bent backs. Sto-
ries were sent around the world of these laborers being
arraigned in court charged with the most infamous and
dastardly crimes. Yet hardly once has it been reported in
the press of the world that in "every trial that has been
held in the State of Colorado during the present strike
where the membership has been charged with almost
every perfidy in the catalogue of crime, a jury has
brought in a verdict of acquittal." (40) On the other
hand, a multitude of murders, wrecks, and dynamite

308 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

explosions have been brought to the door of the detectives
employed by the Mine Owners' Association. It was
found that many ex-convicts and other desperate charac-
ters were employed by the detective agencies to commit
crimes that could be laid upon the working miners.
The story of Orchard and the recital of his atrocious
crimes have occupied columns of every newspaper, but
the fact is rarely mentioned that many of the crimes that
he committed, and which the world to-day attributes to
the officials of the Western Federation of Miners, were
paid for by detective agencies. The special detective of
one of the railroads and a detective of the Mine Owners'
Association were known to have employed Orchard and
other criminals. When Orchard first went to Denver to
seek work from the officials of the Western Federation of
Miners he was given a railroad pass by these detectives
and the money to pay his expenses. (41) During the
three months preceding the blowing up of the Independ-
ence depot Orchard had been seen at least eighteen or
twenty times entering at night by stealth the rooms of
a detective attached to the Mine Owners' Association,
and at least seven meetings were held between him and
the railroad detective already mentioned.

Previous to all this — in September and in November,
1903 — attempts were made to wreck trains. A delinquent
member of the Western Federation of Miners was_
charged with these crimes. He involved in his confes-
sion several prominent members of the Western Federa-
tion of Miners. On cross-examination he testified that
he had formerly been a prize-fighter and that he had
come to Cripple Creek under an assumed name. He
further testified that $250 was his price for wrecking
a train carrying two hundred to three hundred people,
but that he had asked $500 for this job, as another man

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 309 :

would have to work with him. Two detectives had
promised him that amount. An associate of this man
was discovered to have been a detective who had later
joined the Western Federation of Miners. He testified
that he had kept the detective agencies informed as to
the progress of the plot to derail the train. The detect
tive of the Mine Owners' Association admitted that he
and the other detectives had endeavored to induce mem-
bers of the miners' union to enter into the plot; while
the railroad detective testified that he and another de- '\
tective were standing only a few feet away when men
were at work pulling the spikes from the rails. An
engineer on the Florence and Cripple Creek Railroad \
testified that the railroad detective had, a few days before,
asked him where there was a good place for wrecking
the train. The result of the case was that all were ac-
quitted except the ex-prize-fighter, who was held for a
time, but eventually released on $300 bond, furnished by
representatives of 'the mine owners. (42)

On June 6, 1904, when about twenty-five non-union
miners were waiting at the Independence depot for a
train, there was a terrible explosion which resulted in
great loss of life. It has never been discovered who
committed the crime, though the mine owners lost no
time in attributing the explosion to the work of "the
assassins" of the Federation of Miners. When, how-
ever, bloodhounds were put on the trail, they went di-
rectly to the home of one of the detectives in the employ
of the Mine Owners' Association. They were taken back
to the scene of the disaster and again followed the trail
to the same place. A third attempt was made with the
hounds and they followed a trail to the powder maga-
zine of a nearby mine. The Western Federation of
Miners offered a reward of $5,000 for evidence which

310 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

would lead to the arrest and conviction of the criminal
who had perpetrated the outrage at Independence. Un-
fortunately, the criminal was never found. Orchard, a
year or so later, confessed that he had committed the
crime and was paid for it by the officials of the Western
Federation of Miners. The absurdity of that statement
becomes clear when it is known that the court in Denver
was at the very moment of the explosion deciding the
habeas corpus case of Moyer, President of the Western
Federation of Miners. In fact, a few hours after the
explosion the decision of the court was handed down.
As the action of the court was vital not only to Moyer but
to the entire trade-union movement, and, indeed, to re-
publican institutions, it is inconceivable that he or his
friends should have organized an outrage that would
certainly have prejudiced the court at the very moment
it was writing its decision. On the other hand, there
was every reason why the mine owners should have
profited by such an outrage and that their detectives
should have planned one for that moment.*

The atrocities of the Congo occurred in a country with-
out law, in the interest of a great property, and in a series
of battles with a half -savage people. History has some-
what accustomed us to such barbarity; but when, in a
civilized country, with a written constitution, with duly
established courts, with popularly elected representatives,
and apparently with all the necessary machinery for

* The Supreme Court sustained the action of the military au-
thorities, Chief Justice William H. Gabbert, Associate Justice
John Campbell, concurring, Associate Justice Robert W. Steele
dissenting. The dissenting opinion of Justice Steele deserves a
wider reading than it has received, and no doubt it will rank
among the most important statements that have been made
against the anarchy of the powerful and the tyranny of class
government. See Report, U. S. Bureau of Labor, 1905, p. 243.

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 311

dealing out equal justice, one suddenly sees a feudal
despotism arise, as if by magic, to usurp the political,
judicial, and military powers of a great state, and to
use them to arrest hundreds without warrant and throw
them into "bull pens"; to drive hundreds of others out
of their homes and at the point of the bayonet out of the
state ; to force others to labor against their will or to be
beaten; to depose the duly elected officials of the com-
munity ; to insult the courts ; to destroy the property of
those who protest; and even to murder those who show
signs of revolt — one stands aghast. It makes one won-
der just how far in reality we are removed from bar-
barism. Is it possible that the likelihood of the workers
achieving an eight-hour day — which was all that was
wanted in Colorado — could lead to civil war? Yet that
is what might and perhaps should have happened in
Colorado in 1904, when, for a few months, a military
despotism took from the people there all that had been
won by centuries of democratic striving and thrust them
back into the Middle Ages.

Chaotic political and industrial conditions are, of
course, occasionally inevitable in modern society — ^torn
as it is by the very bitter struggle going on constantly
between capital and labor. When this struggle breaks
into war, as it often does, we are bound to suffer some
of the evils that invariably attend war. Certainly, it is
to be expected that the owners of property will exercise
every power they possess to safeguard their property.
They will, whenever possible, use the State and all its
coercive powers in order to retain their mastery over men
and things. The only question is this, must people in
general continue to be the victims of a commerce which
has for its purpose the creation of situations that force
nearly every industrial dispute to become a bloody con-

312 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

flict? When men combine to commit depredations, de-
stroy property, and murder individuals, society must deal
with them — no matter how harshly. But it is an alto-
gether diiierent matter to permit privately paid criminals
to create whenever desired a state of anarchy, in order
to force the military to carry out ferocious measures of
repression against those who have been in no wise
responsible for disorder.

If we will look into this matter a little, we shall dis-
cover certain sinister motives back of this work of the
detective agencies. It is well enough understood by them
that violence creates a state of reaction. One very keen
observer has pointed out that "the anarchist tactics are
so serviceable to the reactionaries that, whenever a dra-
conic, reactionary law is required, they themselves manu-
facture an anarchist plot or attempted crime." (43) Kro-
potkin himself, in telling the story of "The Terror in
Russia," points out that a certain Azeff, who for six-
teen years was an agent of the Russian police, was also
the chief organizer of acts of terrorism among the social
revolutionists. (44) Every conceivable crime was com-
mitted under his direct instigation, including even the
murder of some officials and nobles. The purpose of
the work of this police agent was, of course, to serve the
Russian reactionaries and to furnish them a pretext and
excuse for the most bloody measures of repression. In
America "hireling assassins," ex-convicts, and thugs in
the employ of detective agencies commit very much the
same crimes for the same purpose. And the men on
strike, who have neither planned nor dreamed of plan-
ning an outrage, suddenly find themslves faced by the
military forces, who have not infrequently in the past
shot them down. That the lawless situations which make
these infamous acts possible, and to the general public

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 313

often excusable, are the deliberate work of mercenaries,
is, to my mind, open to no question whatever.

Anyone who cares to look up the history of the labor
movement for the last hundred years will find that in
every great strike private detectives and police agents
have been at work provoking violence. It is almost in-
credible what a large number of criminal operations can
be traced to these paid agents. From 1815 to the pres-
ent day the bitterness of nearly every industrial conflict
of importance has been intensified by the work of these
spies, thugs, and provocateurs. "It was not until we
became infested by spies, incendiaries, and their dupes —
distracting, misleading, and betraying — ^that physical force
was mentioned among us," says Bamford, speaking of
the trade-union activity of 1815-1816. "After that our
moral power waned, and what we gained by the accession
of demagogues we lost by their criminal violence and
the estrangement of real friends." (45) Some of the
notable police agents that appear in the history of labor
are Powell, Mitchell, Legg, Stieber, Greif, Fleury, Baron
von Ungern-Sternberg, Schroeder-Brennwald, Krueger,
Kaufmann, Peukert, Haupt, Von Ehrenberg, Friedeman,
Weiss, Schmidt, and Ihring-Mahlow. In addition we
find Andre, Andrieux, Pourbaix, Melville, and scores
of other high police officials directing the work of these
agents. In America, McPartland, Schaack, and Orchard
— to mention the most notorious only — have played in-
famous roles in provoking others, or in undertaking them-
selves, to commit outrages. There were and are, of
course, thousands of others besides those mentioned,
but these are historic characters, who planned and exe-
cuted the most dastardly deeds in order to discredit the
trade-union and socialist movements. The space here is
too limited to go into the historic details of this com-

314

VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

merce in violence. But he who is curious to pursue the
study further will find a list of references at the end of
the volume directing him to some of the sources of in-
formation. (46) He will there discover an appalling rec^
ord of crime, for, as Thomas Beet points out, hardly a
strike occurs where these special officers are not sent to
make trouble. There are sometimes thousands of them
at work, and, if one undertook to go into the various
trials that have arisen as a result of labor disputes, one
could prepare a long list of murders committed by these
"hireling assassins."

The pecuniary interest of the detective agencies in
provoking crime is immense. It is obvious enough, if
one will but think of it, that these detective agencies
depend for their profit on the existence, the extension^-,
and the promotion of criminal operations. The more that
people are frightened by the prospect of danger to their
property or menace to their lives, the more they seek
the aid of detectives. Nothing proves so advantageous to
detectives as epidemics of strikes and even of robberies
and murders. The heyday of their prosperity comes in
that moment when assaults upon men and property are
most frequent. Nothing would seem to be clearer, then,
than that it is to the interest of these agencies to create
alarm, to arouse terror, and, through these means, to
enlarge their patronage. When a trade or profession has
not only every pecuniary incentive to create trouble, but
when it is also largely promoted by notorious criminals
and other vicious elements, the amount of mischief that is
certain to result from the combination may well exceed
the powers of imagination.

And it must not be forgotten that this trade has de-
veloped into a great and growing business, actuated by
exactly the same economic interests as any other business.

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 315

With the agencies making so much per day for each man
employed, the way to improve business is to get more
men employed. Rumors of trouble or actual deeds, such
as an explosion of dynamite or an assault, help to make
the detective indispensable to the employer. It is with
an eye to business, therefore, that the private detective
creates trouble. It is with a keen sense of his own mate-
rial interest that he keeps the employer in a state of
anxiety regarding what may be expected from the men.
And, naturally enough, the modern employer, unlike a
trained ruler such as Bismarck, never seems to realize that
most of the alarming reports sent him are masses of lies.
Nothing appears to have been clearer to the Iron Chancel-
lor than that his own police forces, in order to gain
favor, "lie and exaggerate in the most shameful man-
ner." (47) But such an idea seems never to enter the
minds of the great American employers, who, although
becoming more and more like the ruling classes of Eu-
rope, are not yet so wise. However, the great employer,
like the great ruler, is unable now to meet his employees
in person and to find out their real views. Consequently,
he must depend upon paid agents to report to him the
views of his men. This might all be very well if the re-
turns were true. But, when it happens that evil reports
are very much to the pecuniary advantage of the man
who makes them^ is it likely that there will be any other
kind of report? Thousands of employers, therefore, are
coming more and more to be convinced that their work-
men spend most of their time plotting against them. It
seems unreasonable that sane men could believe that their
employees, who are regularly at work every day striving
with might and main to support and bring up decently
their families, should be at the same time planning the
most diabolical outrages. Nothing is rarer than to find

3i6 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

criminals among workingmen, for if they were given to
crime they would not be at work. But with the great
modern evil — the separation of the classes — there comes
so much of misunderstanding and of mistrust that the
employer seems only too willing to believe any paid villain
who tells him that his tired and worn laborers have mur-
der in their hearts. The class struggle is a terrible fact ;
but the class hatred and the personal enmity that are
growing among both masters and men in the United
States are natural and inevitable results of this system of
spies and informers.

How widespread this evil has become is shown by the
fact that nearly every large corporation now employs
numerous spies, informers, and special officers, from
whom they receive daily reports concerning the conver-
sations among their men and the plans of the unions.
Thousands of these detectives are, in fact, members of
the unions. The employers are, of course, under the im-
pression that they are thus protecting themselves from
misinformation and also from the possibility of injury,
but, as we have seen, they are in reality placing them-
selves at the mercy of these spies in the same manner
as every despot in the past has placed himself at
the mercy of those who brought him information.
It may, perhaps, be possible that the Carnegie Company
in 1892, the railroads in 1894, and the mine owners in
1904 were convinced that their employees were under the
influence of dangerous men. Very likely they were told
that their workmen were planning assaults upon their
lives and property. It would not be strange if these large
owners of property had been so informed. Indeed, the
economics of this whole wretched commerce" becomes
clear only when we realize that the terror that results
from such reports leads these capitalists to employ more

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 317

and more hirelings, to pay them larger and larger fees,
and in this manner to reward lies and to make even as-
saults prove immensely profitable to the detectives. So
it happens that the great employers are chiefly responsible
for introducing among their men the very elements that
are making for riot, crime, and anarchy.

Close and intimate relations with the employers and
with the men during several fiercely fought industrial
conflicts have convinced me that the struggle between
them rarely degenerates to that plane of barbarism in
which either the men or the masters deliberately resort
to, or encourage, murder, arson, and similar crimes.
So far as the men are concerned, they have every reason
in the world to discourage violence, and nothing is clearer
to most of them than the solemn fact that every time
property is destroyed, or men injured, the employers
win public support, the aid of the press, the pulpit, the
police, the courts, and all the powers of the State. Men
do not knowingly injure themselves or persist in a course
adverse to their material interests. It is true, as I think
I have made clear in the previous chapters, that some of
the workers do advocate violence, and, in a few cases
that instantly became notorious, labor leaders have been
found guilty of serious crimes. That these instances are
comparatively rare is explained, of course, by the fact
that violence is known invariably to injure the cause of
the worker. It would be strange, therefore, if the work-
ers did systematically plan outrages. On the other hand,
it would be strange if the employers did not at times
rejoice that somebody — the workmen, the detectives, or
others — had committed some outrage and thus brought
the public sentiment and the State's power to the aid of
the employers. One cannot escape the thought that the
employers would hardly finance so readily these so-called

3i8 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT.

detectives, and inquire so little into their actual deeds, if
they were not convinced that violence at the time of a
strike materially aids the employer. Yet, despite evi-
dence to the contrary, it may, I think, be said with truth
that the lawlessness attending strikes is not, as a rule,
the result of deliberate planning on the part of the men
or of the masters.

There are, of course, numerous exceptions, and if we
find the McNamaras on the one side, we also find some un-
scrupulous employers on the other. To the latter, violence
becomes of the greatest service, in that it enables them
to say with apparent truth that they are not fighting
reasonable, law-abiding workmen, but assassins and incen-
diaries. No course is easier for the employer who does
not seek to deal honestly with his men, and none more
secure for that employer whose position is wholly inde-
fensible on the subject of hours and wages, than to side-
track all these issues by hypocritically declaring that he
refuses to deal with men who are led by criminals. And
it is quite beyond question that some such employers
have deliberately urged their "detectives" to create
trouble. Positive evidence is at hand that a few such
employers have themselves directed the work of incen-
diaries, thugs, and rioters. With such amazing evidence
as we have recently had concerning the systematically •
lawless work of the Manufacturers' Association, it is
impossible to free the employers of all personal responsi-
bility for the outrages committed by their criminal agent^
There are many different ways in which violence benefi^
the employer, and it may even be said that in all cases itl
is only to the interest of the employer. As a matter of]
fact, with the systems of insurance now existing, any
injury to the property of the employer means no loss to
him whatever. The only possible loss that he can suffer

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 319

is through the prolongation and success of the strike.
If the workers can be discredited and the strike broken
through the aid of violence, the ordinary employer is
not likely to make too rigid an investigation into whether
or not his "detectives" had a hand in it.

C Curiously enough, the general public never dreams that
ecial officers are responsible for most of the violence
at times of strike, and, while the men loudly accuse the
employers, the employers loudly accuse the men. THe
employers are, of course, informed by the detectives that
the outrages have been committed by the strikers, ana
the detectives have seen to it that the employers are
prepared to believe that the strikers are capable of any-
thing. On the other hand, the men are convinced th4t
the employers are personally responsible. They see hun-
dreds and sometimes thousands of special officers swarm-
ing throughout the district. They know that these men
are paid by somebody, and they are convinced that their
bullying, insulting talk and actions represent the personal
wishes of the employers. When they knock down strik-
ers, beat them up, arrest them, or even shoot them, the
men believe that all these acts are dictated by the em-
ployers. It is utterly impossible to describe the bitterness
that is aroused among the men by the presence of these
thugs. And the testimony taken by various commissions
regarding strikes proves clearly enough that strikes are
not only embittered but prolonged by the presence of
detectives. Again and again, mediators have declared
that, as soon as thugs are brought into the conflict, the
settlement of a strike is made impossible until either the
employers or the men are exhausted by the struggle. A
number of reputable detectives have testified that
the chief object of those who engage in "strike-breaking"
is to prolong strikes in order to keep themselves employed

320 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

as long as possible. Thus, the employers as well as the
men are the victims of this commerce in violence.

It will, I am sure, be obvious to the reader that it
would require a very large volume to deal with all the
various phases of the work of the detective in the
numerous great strikes that have occurred in recent years.
I have endeavored merely to mention a few instances
where their activities have led to the breaking down of
all civil government. It is important, however, to em-
phasize the fact that there is no strike of any magnitude
in which these hirelings are not employed. I have taken
the following quotation as typical of numerous circulars
which I have seen, that have been issued by detective
agencies : "This bureau has made a specialty of handling
strikes for over half a century, and our clients are among
the largest corporations in the world. During the recent
trouble between the steamboat companies and the striking
longshoremen in New York City this office . . . sup-
plied one thousand guards. . . . Our charges for
guards, motormen, conductors, and all classes of men
during the time of trouble is $5.00 per day, your com-
pany to pay transportation, board, and lodge the men."
(48) Here is another agency that has been engaged
in this business for half a century, and there are thou-
sands of others engaged in it now. One of them is
known to have in its employ constantly five thousand men.
And, if we look into the deeds of these great armies of
mercenaries, we find that there is not a state in the
Union in which they have not committed assault, arsQn,
robbery, and murder. Several years ago at Lattimer^
Pennsylvania, a perfectly peaceable parade of two hun-i
dred and fifty miners was attacked by guards armed with
Winchester rifles, with the result that twenty-nine work-
ers were killed and thirty others seriously injured. This .

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 321

was deliberate and unprovoked slaughter. Recently, in
the Westmoreland mining district, no less than twenty
striking miners have been murdered, while several hun-
dred have been seriously injured. On one occasion depu-
ties and strike-breakers became intoxicated and "shot jjp
the town" of Latrobe. In the recent strike against the
Lake Carriers' Association six union men were killed by
private detectives. In Tampa, Florida, in Columbus,
Ohio, in Birmingham, Alabama, in Lawrence, Massachu-
setts, in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, in the mining districts
of West Virginia, and in innumerable other places many
workingmen have been murdered, not by officers of the
law, but by privately paid assassins.

Even while writing these lines I notice a telegram to
the Appeal to Reason from Adolph Germer, an official
of the United Mine Workers of America, that some
thugs, formerly in West Virginia, are now in Colorado,
and that their first work there was to shoot down in
cold blood a well-known miner. John Walker, a district"
president of the United Mine Workers of America, tele-
graphs the same day to the labor press that two of the
strikers in the copper mines in Michigan were shot down
by detectives, in the effort, he says, to provoke the men
to violence. Anyone who cares to follow the labor press
for but a short period will be astonished to find how
frequently such outrages occur, and he will marvel that
men can be so self-controlled as the strikers usually are
under such' terrible provocation. I mention hastily these
facts in order to emphasize the point that the cases in
which I have gone into detail in this chapter are more
or less typical of the bloody character of many of the
great strikes because of the deeds of the so-called de-
tectives.

Brief, however, as this statement is of the work of these

322

VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

anarchists "without phrase" and of the great commerce
raejUiave built up, it must, nevertheless, convince anyone
that republican institutions cannot long exist in a country
which tolerates such an extensive private commerce in
lawlessness and crime. Government by law cannot pre-
vail in the same field with a widespread and profitable
traffic in disorder, thuggery, arson, and murder. Here is
a whole brood of mercenaries, the output of hundreds of
great penitentiaries, that has been organized and syste-
matized into a great commerce to serve the rich and
powerful. Here is a whole mess of infamy developed
into a great private enterprise that militates against all
law and order. It has already brought the United States
on more than one occasion to the verge of civil war.
And, despite the fact that numerous judges have publicly
condemned the work of these agencies, and that various
governmental commissions have deprecated in the most
solemn words this traffic in crime, it continues to grow
and prosper in the most alarming manner. Certainly, no
student of history will doubt that, if this commerce is
permitted to continue, it will not be long until no man's
life, honor, or property will be secure. And it is a ques-
tion, even at this moment, whether the legislators have
the courage to attack this powerful American Mafia that
has already developed into a "vested interest." >

As I said at the beginning, no other country has this
form of anarchy to contend with. In all countries, no
doubt, there are associations of criminals, and every-
where, perhaps, it is possible for wealthy men to employ
criminals to work for them. But even the Mafia, the
Camorra, and the Black Hand do not exist for the pur-
pose of collecting and organizing mercenaries to serve the
rich and powerful. Nor anywhere else in the world are
these ■ criminals made special officers, deputy sheriflfs,

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM

323

V deputy marshals, and thus given the authority of the
State itself. The assumption is so general that the State
; invariably stands behind the private detective that few
seem to question it, and even the courts frequently recog-
nize them as quasi-public officials. Thus, the State itself
aids and abets these mercenary anarchists, while it sends
to the gallows idealist anarchists, such as Henry, Vaillant,
Lingg, and their like. That the State fosters this "infant
industry" is the only possible explanation for the fact
that in every industrial conflict of the past the real pro-
vokers and executors of arson, riot, and murder have
escaped prison, while in every case labor leaders have
been put in jail — often without warrant — and in many
cases kept there for many months without trial. Even
the writ of habeas corpus has been denied them re-
j peatedly. Without the active connivance of the State
such conditions could not exist. However, the State goes
even further in its opposition to labor. The power of a
state governor to call out the militia, to declare even a
peaceful district in a state of insurrection, and to abolish
the writ of habeas corpus is a very great power indeed
and one that is unquestionably an anomaly in a re-
public. If that power were used with equal justice, it
might not create the intense bitterness that has been so
frequently aroused among the workers by its exercise,
^gain and again it has been used in the interest of capital,
but there is not one single case in all the records where
this extraordinary prerogative has been exercised to pro-
tect the interest of the workers. It is not, then, either
unreasonable or unjustifiable that among workmen the
sentiment is almost unanimous that the State stands in-
variably against them. The three instances which I have
dealt with here at some length prove conclusively that
" there is now no penalty inflicted upon the capitalist who

324 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

hires thugs to invade a community and shoot down its
citizens, or upon those who hire him these assassins, or
upon the assassins themselves. Nor are the powerful
punished when they collect a great army of criminals,
drunkards, and hoodlums and make them officials of the
United States to insult and bully decent citizens. Nor
does there seem to be any punishment inflicted upon
those who manage to transform the Government itself
into a shield to protect toughs and criminals in their as-
saults upon men and property, when those assaults are in
the interest of capital. Moreover, what could be more
humiliating in a republic than the fact that a governor
who has leased to his friends the military forces of an
entire state should end his term of office unimpeached?
'-^. These various phases of the class conflict reveal a
distressing state of industrial and political anarchy, and
there can be no question that, if continued, it has in it
the power of making many McNamaras, if not Bakou-
nins. It will be fortunate, indeed, if there do not arise
new Johann Mosts, and if the United States escapes
the general use in time of that terrible, secretive,
and deadly weapon of sabotage. Sabotage is the
arm of the slave or the coward, who dares neither
to speak his views nor to fight an open fight. As
someone has said, it may merely mean the kicking of
the master's dog. Yet no one is so cruel as the weak and
the cowardly. And should it ever come about that
millions and millions of men have all other avenues closed
to them, there is still left to them sabotage, assassination,
and civil war. These can neither be outlawed nor even
effectively guarded against if there are individuals
enough who are disposed to wield them. And it is not
by any means idle speculation that a country which can
sit calmly by and face such evils as are perpetrated by

THE OLDEST ANARCHISM 325

this vast commerce in violence, by this class use of the
State, and by such monstrous outrages as were com-
mitted in Homestead, in Chicago, and in Colorado, will
find one day its composure interrupted by a working class
that has suffered more than human endurance can stand.

The fact is that society — the big body of us — is now
menaced by two sets of anarchists. There are those
among the poor and the weak who preach arson, dyna-
mite, and sabotage. They are the products of conditions
such as existed in Colorado — as Bakounin was the prod-
uct of the conditions in Russia. These, after all, are rela-
tively few, and their power is almost nothing. They are
listened to now, but not heeded, because there yet exist
among the people faith in the ultimate victory of peace-
able means and the hope that men and not property will
one day rule the State. The other set of anarchists are
those powerful, influential terrorists who talk hypocriti-
cally of their devotion to the State, the law, the Consti-
tution, and the courts, but who, when the slightest ob-
stacle stands in the path of their greed, seize from their
corrupt tools the reins of government, in order to rule
society with the black-jack and the "bull pen." The
idealist anarchist and even the more practical syndicalist,
preaching openly and frankly that there is nothing left
to the poor but war, are, after all, few in number and
weak in action. Yet how many to-day despair of peace-
able methods when they see all these outrages committed
by mercenaries, protected and abetted by the official State,
in the interest of the most sordid anarchism!

As a matter of fact, the socialist is to-day almost alone,
among those watching intently this industrial strife, in
keeping buoyant his abiding faith in the ultimate victory
of the people. He has fought successfully against Ba-
kounin. He is overcoming the newest anarchists, and

326 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

he is already measuring swords with the oldest anarchists.
He is confident as to the issue. He has more than
dreams ; he knows, and has all the comfort of that knowl-
edge, that anarchy in government like anarchy in pro-
duction is reaching the end of its rope. Outlawry for
profit, as well as production for profit, are soon to be
things of the past. The socialist feels himself a part
of the growing power that is soon to rule society. He
is conscious of being an agent of a world-wide move-
ment that is massing into an irresistible human force
millions upon millions of the disinherited. He has un-
bounded faith that through that mass power industry
will be socialized and the State democratized. No longer
will its use be merely to serve and promote private enter-
prise in foul tenements, in sweatshops, and in all the
products that are necessary to life and to death. All
these vast commercial enterprises that exist not to serve
society but to enrich the rich — including even this sordid
traffic in thuggery and in murder — are soon to pass into
history as part of a terrible, culminating epoch in com-
mercial, financial, and political anarchy. The socialist,
who sees the root of all anti-social individualism in the
predominance of private material interests over com-
munal material interests, knows that the hour is arriving
when the social instincts and the life interests of prac-
tically all the people will be arrayed against anarchy in all
its forms. Commerce in violence, like commerce in the
necessaries of life, is but a part of a social regime that
is disappearing, and, while most others in society seem
to see only phases of this gigantic conflict between capital
and labor, and, while most others look upon it as some-
thing irremediable, the socialist, standing amidst millions
upon millions of his comrades, is even now beginning to
see visions of victory.

CHAPTER XII

VISIONS OF VICTORY

We left the socialists, on September 30, 1890, in the
midst of jubilation over the great victory they had just
won in Germany. The Iron Chancellor, with all the
power of State and society in his hands, had capitulated
before the moral force and mass power of the German
working class. And, when the sensational news went out
to all countries that the German socialists had polled
1,427,000 votes, the impulse given to the political organ-
izations of the working class was immense. Once again
the thought of labor throughout the world was centered
upon those stirring words of Marx and Engels : "Work-
ingmen of all countries. Unite !" First uttered by them
in '47, repeated in '64, and pleaded for once again in '72,
this call to unity began to appear in the nineties as the
one supreme commandment of the labor movement. And,
in truth, it is an epitome of all their teachings. It is
the pith of their program and the marrow of their prin-
ciples. Nearly all else can be waived. Other principles
can be altered; other programs abandoned; other meth-
ods revolutionized; but this principle, program, and
method must not be tampered with. It is the one and
only unalterable law. In unity, and in unity alone, is
the power of salvation. And under the inspiration of this
call more and more millions have come togethf rj^ until
to-day, in every portion of the world, there are multit'uae^
affiliated to the one and only international army. In '47>

337 \

328 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT -

it was not yet'born. In '64 efforts were made to bring it
into being. In '72 it was broken into fragments. In '90
it won its first battle — its right to exist. Now, twenty-
three years later, nothing could be so eloquent and im-
pressive as the figures themselves of the rising tide of
international socialism.

THE SOCIALIST AND LABOR VOTE, 1887-1913.

1887 1892 1897 1903 1913

Germany 763,000 1,786,000 2,107,000 3,010,000 4,250,329

France 47,000 440,000 790,000 805,000 1,125,877

Austria 750,000 780,000 1,081,441

United States. .. . 2,000 21,000 65,000 223,494 931,406

Italy 26,000 135,000 300,000 825,280

AustraUa 678,012

Belgium 320,000 457,000 464,000 (a) 600,000

Great Britain 55,000 100,000 373,645

Finland 10,000 320,289

Russia 200,000

Sweden 723 10,000 170,299

Norway 7,000 30,000 124,594

Denmark 8,000 20,000 32,000 53,000 107,015

Switzerland 2,000 39,000 40,000 70,000 105,000

HoUand 1,500 13,000 38,000 82,494

New Zealand 44,960

Spain 5,000 14,000 23,000 40,725

Bulgaria 25,565

Argentina 54,000

Chile 18,000

Greece 26,000

Canada 10,780

Servia 9,000

Luxembourg 4,000

Portugal 3,308

Roumania 2,057

Total 823,500 2,657,723 4,455,000 5,916,494 11,214,076

(a) The vote for Belgium is estimated. The Liberals and the
Socialists combined at the last election in opposition to the Clericals,
and together polled over 1,200,000 votes. The British Socialist
Year Book, 1913, estimates the totaJ Socialist vote at about 600,000.

The above table explains, in no small measure, the
quiet patience and supreme confidence of the socialist.

VISIONS OF VICTORY 329

He looks upon that wonderful array of figures as the one
most significant fact in the modern world. Within a
quarter of a century his force has grown from 800,000
to ii,ocx),ooo. And, while no other movement in his-
tory has grown so rapidly and traversed the entire world
with such speed, the socialist knows that even this table
inadequately indicates his real power. For instance, in
Great Britain the Labor Party has over one million
dues-paying members, yet its vote is here placed at 373,-
645. Owing to the peculiar political conditions existing in
that country, it is almost impossible for the Labor
Party to put up its candidates in all districts, and these
figures include only that small proportion of workingmen
who have been able to cast their votes for their own can-
didates. The two hundred thousand socialist votes in
Russia do not at all represent the sentiment in that coun-
try. Everything there militates against the open expres-
sion, and, indeed, the possibility of any expression, of
the actual socialist sentiment. In addition, great masses
of workingmen in many countries are still deprived of
the suffrage, and in nearly all countries the wives of
these men are deprived of the suffrage. Leaving, how-
ever, all this aside, and taking the common reckoning of
five persons to each voter, the socialist strength of the
world to-day cannot be estimated at less than fifty mil-
lion souls.

Coming to the parliamentary strength of the socialists,
we find the table on the following page illuminating.

It appears that labor is in control of Australia, that 45
per cent, of the Finnish Parliament is socialist, while in
Sweden more than a third, and in Germany and Den-
mark somewhat less than a third, is socialist. In several
of the Northern countries of Europe the parliamentary
position of the socialists is stronger than that of any

330 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

SOCIALIST AND LABOR REPRESENTATIVES
IN PARLIAMENT.

Number of Seats Per

in Lower House. Cent.

Total Socialist. Socialist

Australia 75 41 54.61

Finland 200 90 45.00

Sweden 165 64 38.79

Denmark 114 32 28.07

Germany 397 110 27.71

Belgium 186 39 20.96

Norway 123 23 18.70

HoUand 100 17 17.00

Austria 516 82 15.89

Italy 508 78 15.35

Luxembourg 53 7 13.21

France 597 75 12.56

Switzerland 170 15 8.82

Great Britain 670 41 6.12

Russia 442 16 3.62

Greece 207 4 2.00

Argentina 120 2 1.67

Servia 160 1 .62

Portugal 164 1 .61

Bulgaria 189 1 .53

~ " 404 1 .25

Other single party. In addition to the representatives
here listed, Belgium has seven senators, Denmark four,
and Sweden twelve, while in the state legislatures Austria
has thirty-one, Germany one hundred and eighty-five, and
the United States twenty. Here again the strength of
socialism is greatly understated. In the United States,
for instance, the astonishing fact appears that, with a
vote of nearly a million, the socialist party has not one
representative in Congress. On the basis of proportional
representation it would have at least twenty-five Con-
gressmen ; and, if it were a sectional party, it could, with
its million votes, control all the Southern states and elect
every Congressman and Senator from those states. The

VISIONS OF VICTORY 331

socialists in the German Reichstag are numerous, but on
a fair system of representation they would have two or
three score more representatives than at present. How-
ever, this, too, is of little consequence, and in no wise
disturbs the thoughtful socialist. The immense progress
of his cause completely satisfies him, and, if the rate
of advance continues, it can be only a few years until a
world victory is at hand.

If, now, we turn from the political aspects of the labor
movement to examine the growth of cooperatives and of
trade unions, we find a progress no less striking. In
actual membership the trade unions of twenty nations in
191 1 had amassed over eleven million men and women.
And the figures sent out by the international secretary
do not include countries so strongly organized as Canada,
New Zealand, and Australia. Unfortunately, it is im-
possible to add here reliable figures regarding the wealth
of the great and growing cooperative movement. In
Britain, Germany, Belgium, France, Italy, and Switzer-
land, as well as in the Northern countries of Central
Europe, the cooperative movement has made enormous '
headway in recent years. The British cooperators, ac-
cording to the report of the Federation of Cooperative
Societies, had in 1912 a turnover amounting to over six
hundred millions of dollars. They have over twenty-
four hundred stores scattered throughout the cities of
Great Britain. The Cooperative Productive Society and
the Cooperative Wholesale Society produced goods in
their own shops to a value of over sixty-five millions of
dollars; while the goods produced by the Cooperative
Provision Stores amounted to over forty million dollars.
Seven hundred and sixty societies have Children's Penny
Banks, with a total balance in hand of about eight mil-
lion dollars. The members of these various cooperative

332 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

societies number approximately three million.* Through-
out all Europe, through cooperative effort, there have
been erected hundreds of splendid "Houses of the Peo-
ple," "Labor Temples," and similar places of meeting
and recreation. The entire labor, socialist, and coopera-
tive press, numbering many thousands of monthly and
weekly journals, and hundreds of daily papers, is also
usually owned cooperatively. Unfortunately, the statis-
tics dealing with this phase of the labor movement have
never been gathered with any idea of completeness, and
there is little use in trying even to estimate the immense
wealth that is now owned by these organizations of work-
ingmen. ^

America lags somewhat behind the other countries,
but nowhere else have such difficulties faced tl\e labor
movement. With a working class made up of many races,
nationalities, and creeds, trade-union organization is ex-
cessively difficult. Moreover, where the railroads secretly
rebate certain industries and help to destroy the competi-
tors of those industries, and where the trusts exercise
enormous power, a cooperative movement is well-nigh
impossible. Furthermore, where vast numbers of the
working class are still disfranchised, and where elections
are notoriously corrupt and more or less under the con-
trol of a hireling class of professional political manipula-
tors, an independent political movement faces almost in-
surmountable obstacles. Nor is this all. No other,
country allows its ruling classes to employ private armies,
thugs, and assassins ; and no other country makes such an
effort to prevent the working classes from acting peace- ,
ably and legally. While nearly everywhere else the
unions may strike, picket, and boycott, in America there

♦Above data taken from International News Letter of Na-
tional Trade Union Centers, Berlin, May 30, 1913.

VISIONS OF VICTORY

333

[are laws to prevent both picketing and boycotting, and
even some forms of strikes. The most extraordinary
despotic judicial powers are exercised to crush the unions,
to break strikes, and to imprison union men. And, if
paid professional armies of detectives deal with the
unions, so paid professional armies of politicians deal
with the socialists. By every form of debauchery, law-
lessness, and corruption they are beaten back, and, al-
though it is absolutely incredible, not a single representa-
tive of a great party polling nearly a million votes sits
in the Congress of the United States.

Nevertheless, the American socialist and labor move-
ment is making headway, and the day is not far distant
when it will exercise the power its strength merits. Al-
though somewhat more belated, the various elements of
the working class are coming closer and closer together,
and it cannot be long until there will be perfect harmony
throughout the entire movement. In many other coun-
tries this harmony already exists. The trade-union, co-
operative, and socialist movements are so closely tied
together that they move in every industrial, political, and
commercial conflict in complete accord. So far as the
immediate aims of labor are concerned, they may be
said to be almost identical in all countries. Professor
Werner Sombart, who for years has watched the world
movement more carefully perhaps than anyone else, has
pointed out that there is a strong tendency to uniformity
in all countries — a "tendency," in his own words, "of
the movement in all lands toward socialism." (i) In-
deed, nothing so much astonishes careful observers of
the labor movement as the extraordinary rapidity with
which the whole world of labor is becoming unified, in
its program of principles, in its form of organization,
and in its methods of action. The books of Marx and

334 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

Engels are now translated into every important language
and are read with eagerness in all parts of the world.
The Communist Manifesto of 1847 is issued by the
socialist parties of all countries as the text-book of the
movement. Indeed, it is not uncommon nowadays to see
a socialist book translated immediately into all the chief
languages and circulated by millions of copies. And, if
one will take up the political programs of the party
in the twenty chief nations of the world, he will find them
reading almost word for word alike. For these various
reasons no informed person to-day questions the claims
of the socialist as to the international, wojld-wide char-
acter of the movement.

Perhaps there is no experience quite like that of the
socialist who attends one of the great periodical gather-
ings of the international movement. He sees there a
thousand or more delegates, with credentials from organi-
zations numbering approximately ten million adherents.
They come from all parts of the world — from mills,
mines, factories, and fields — ^to meet together, and, in
the recent congresses, to pass in utmost harmony their
resolutions in opposition to the existing regime and their
suggestions for remedial action. Not only the countries
of Western Europe, but Russia, Japan, China, and the
South American Republics send their representatives, and,
although the delegates speak as many as thirty different
languages, they manage to assemble in a common meeting,
and, with hardly a dissenting voice, transact their busi-
ness. When we consider all the jealousy, rivalry, and
hatred that have been whipped up for hundreds of years
among the peoples of the various nations, races, and
creeds, these international congresses of workingmen be-
come in themselves one of the greatest achievements of
modern times.

VISIONS OF VICTORY 335

Although Marx was, as I think I have made clear, and
still is, the guiding spirit of modern socialism, the huge
structure of the present labor movement has not been
erected by any great architect who saw it all in ad-
vance, nor has any great leader molded its varied and
wonderful lines. It is the work of a multitude, who have
quarreled among themselves at every stage of its build-
ing. They differed as to the purpose of the structure, as
to the materials to be used, and, indeed, upon every de-
tail, big and little, that has had to do with it. At times
all building has been stopped in order that the different
views might be harmonized or the quarrels fought to a
finish. Again and again portions have been built only to
be torn down and thrown aside. Some have seen more
clearly than others the work to be done, and one, at least,
of the architects must be recognized as a kind of prophet
who, in the main, outlined the structure. But the archi-
tects were not the builders, and among the multitude en-
gaged in that work there have been years of quarrels and
decades of strife. The story of terrorism, as told, is
that of a group who had no conception of the structure to
be erected. They were a band of dissidents, without
patience to build. They and their kind have never been
absent from the labor movement, and, in fact, for nearly
one hundred years a battle has raged in one form or
another between those few of the workers who were
urging, with passionate fire, what they called "action"
and that multitude of others who day and night were
laying stone upon stone.

No individual — in fact, nothing but a force as strong
and compelling as a natural law — could have brought
into existence such a vast solidarity as now exists in the >
world of labor. Like food and drink, the organization
of labor satisfies an inherent necessity. The workers

336 VIOLENCE AND THE LiABOR MOVEMENT

crave its protection, seek its guidance, and possess a
sense of security only when supported by its solidarity.
Only something as intuitively impelling as the desire for
life could have called forth the labor and love and sacri-
fice that have been lavishly expended in the dishearten-
ing and incredibly tedious work of labor organization.
The upbuilding of the labor movement has seemed at
times like constructing a house of cards: often it was
hardly begun before some ill wind cast it down. It has
cost many of its creators exile, imprisonment, starvation,
and death. With one mighty assault its opponents have
often razed to the ground the work of years. Yet, as
soon as the eyes of its destroyers were turned, a multi-
tude of loving hands and broken hearts set to work to
patch up its scattered fragments and build it anew. The
labor movement is unconquerable.

Unlike many other aggregations, associations, and
benevolent orders, unlike the Church, to which it is fre-
quently compared, the labor movement is not a purely
voluntary union. No doubt there is a camaraderie in
that movement, and unquestionably the warmest spirit of
fellowship often prevails, but the really effective cause
for working-class unity is economic necessity. The work-
ers have been driven together. The unions subsist not
because of leaders and agitators, but because of the com-
pelling economic interests of their members. They are
efforts to allay the deadly strife among workers, as or-
ganizations of capital are efforts to allay the deadly strife
among capitalists. The cooperative movement has grown
into a vast commerce wholly because it served the self-
interest of the workers. The trade unions have grown
big in all countries because of the protection they offer
and the insurance they provide against low wages, long
hours, and poverty. The socialist parties have grown

VISIONS OF VICTORY 337

great because they express the highest social aspirations
of the workers and their antagonism toward the present
regime. Moreover, they offer an opportunity to put for-
ward, in the most authoritative places, the demands of
the workers for political, social, and economic reform.
The whole is a struggle for democracy, both political and
industrial, that is by no means founded merely on whim
or caprice. It has gradually become a religion, an im-
perative religion, of millions of workingmen and women.
Chiefly because of their economic subjection, they are
striving in the most heroic manner to make their voice
heard in those places where the rules of the game of life
are decided. Thus, every phase of the labor movement
has arisen in response to actual material needs.

And, if the labor movement has arisen in response to
actual material needs, it is now a very great and material
actuality. The workingmen of the world are, as we
have seen, uniting at a pace so rapid as to be almost
unbelievable. There are to-day not only great national
organizations of labor in nearly every country, but these
national movements are bound closely together into one
unified international power. The great world-wide move-
ment of labor, which Marx and Engels prophesied would
come, is now here. And, if they were living to-day, they
could not but be astonished at the real and mighty mani-
festation of their early dreams. To be sure, Engels lived
long enough to be jubilant over the massing of labor's
forces, but Marx saw little of it, and even the German
socialists, who started out so brilliantly, were at the time
of his death fighting desperately for existence under the
anti-socialist law. Indeed, in 1883, the year of his death,
the labor movement was still torn by quarrels and dissen-
sions over problems of tactics, and in America, France,
and Austria the terrorists were more active than at any

338 VIOLENCE AND THE IjABOR MOVEMENT

time in their history. It was still a question whether the
German movement could survive, while in the other coun-
tries the socialists were still little more than sects. That
was just thirty years ago, while to-day, as we have seen,
over ten millions of workingmen, scattered throughout
the entire world, fight every one of their battles on the
lines laid down by Marx. The tactics and principles he
outlined are now theirs. The unity of the workers he
pleaded for is rapidly being achieved throughout the en-
tire world, and everywhere these armies are marching
toward the goal made clear by his life and labor. "Al-
though I have seen him to-night," writes Engels to Lieb-
knecht, March 14, 1883, "stretched out on his bed, the
face rigid in death, I cannot grasp the thought that this
genius should have ceased to fertilize with his powerful
thoughts the proletarian movement of both worlds.
Whatever we all are, we are through him ; and whatever
the movement of to-day is, it is through his theoretical
and practical work ; without him we should still be stuck
in the mire of confusion." (2)

What was this mire? If we will cast our eyes back
to the middle of last century we cannot but realize that
the ideas of the world have undergone a complete revolu-
tion. When Marx began his work with the labor move-
ment there was absolute ignorance among both masters
and men concerning the nature of capitalism. It was a
great and terrible enigma which no one understood.
The working class itself was broken up into innumerable
guerilla bands fighting hopelessly, aimlessly, with the most
antiquated and ineffectual weapons. They were in mis-
ery ; but why, they knew not. They left their work to riot
for days and weeks, without aim and without purpose.
They were bitter and sullen. They smashed machines
and burned factories, chiefly because they were totally

VISIONS OF VICTORY 339

ignorant of the causes of their misery or of the nature
of their real antagonist. Not seldom in those days there
were meetings of hundreds of thousands of laborers, and
not infrequently mysterious epidemics of fires and of ma-
chine-breaking occurred throughout all the factory dis-
tricts. Again and again the soldiers were brought out
to massacre the laborers. In all England — then the most
advanced industrially — there were few who understood
capitalism, and among masters or men there was hardly
one who knew the real source of all the immense, intoler-
able economic evils.

The class struggle was there, and it was being fought
more furiously and violently than ever before or since.
The most striking rebels of the time were those that
Marx called the "bourgeois democrats." They were for-
ever preaching open and violent revolution. They were
dreaming of the glorious day when, amid insurrection
and riot, they should stand at the barricades, fighting the
battle for freedom. In their little circles they "were lay-
ing plans for the overthrow of the world and intoxicating
themselves day by day, evening by evening, with the
hasheesh-drink of: 'To-morrow it will start;' " (3) Be-
fore and after the revolutionary period of '48 there were
innumerable thousands of these fugitives, exiles, and men
of action obsessed with the dream that a great revolu-
tionary cataclysm was soon to occur which would lay in
ruins the old society. That a crisis was impending every-
one believed, including even Marx and Engels. _ In fact,
for over twenty years, from 1847 to 1871, the "extempor-
izers of revolutions" fretfully awaited the supreme hour.
Toward the end of the period appeared Bakounin and
Nechayeff with their robber worship, conspiratory secret
societies, and international network of revolutionists.
Wherever capitalism made headway the workers grew

340 VIOLENCE AND THE LiABOR MOVEMENT

more and more rebellious, but neither they nor those who
sought to lead them, and often did, in fact, lead them,
had much of any program beyond destruction. Bakou-
nin was not far wrong, at the time, in thinking that he
was "spreading among the masses ideas corresponding
to the instincts of the masses," (4) when he advocated
the destruction of the Government, the Church, the mills,
the factories, and the palaces, to the end that "not a stone
should be left upon a stone."

This was the mire of confusion that Engels speaks of.
There was not one with any program at all adequate to
meet the problem. The aim of the rebels went little be-
yond retaliation and destruction. What were the weapons
employed by the warriors of this period ? Street riots and
barricades were those of the "bourgeois democrats";
strikes, machine-breaking, and incendiarism were those of
the workers; and later the terrorists came with their
robber worship and Propaganda of the Deed. In the
midst of this veritable passion for destruction Marx and
Engels found themselves. Here was a period when direct
action was supreme. There was nothing else, and no
one dreamed of anything else. The enemies of the exist-
ing order were employing exactly the same means and
methods used by the upholders of that order. Among
the workers, for instance, the only weapons used were
general strikes, boycotts, and what is now called sabotage.
These were wholly imitative and retaliative. It is clear
that the strike is, after all, only an inverted lockout;
and as early as 1833 ^ general strike was parried by a
general lockout. The boycott is identical with the black-
list. The employer boycotts union leaders and union
men. The employees boycott the non-union products of
the employer; while sabotage, the most ancient weapon
of labor, answers poor pay with poor work, and broken

VISIONS OF VICTORY 341

machines for broken lives. And, if the working class
was striking back with the same weapons that were being
used against it, so, too, were the "pan-destroyers," ex
cept that for the most part their weapons were incredibly
inadequate and ridiculous. Sticks and stones and barri-
cades were their method of combating rifles and trained
armies. All this again is more evidence of the mire of
confusion.

However, if the weapons of the rebellious were utterly
futile and ineffectual, there were no others, for every
move the workers or their friends made was considered
lawless. All political and trades associations were against
the law. Peaceable assembly was sedition. Strikes were
treason. Picketing was intimidation ; and the boycott was
conspiracy in restraint of trade. Such associations as
existed were forced to become secret societies, and, even
if a working-class newspaper appeared, it was almost im-
mediately suppressed. And, if all forms of trade-union
activity were criminal, political activity was impossible
where the vast majority of toilers had no votes. With
methods mainly imitative, retaliative, and revengeful;
with no program of what was wanted ; in total ignorance
of the causes of their misery; and with little appreciation
that in unity there is strength, the workers and their
friends, in the middle of the last century, were stuck in
the mire — of ignorance, helplessness, and confusion.

This was the world in which Marx and Engels began
their labor. Direct action was at its zenith, and the
struggle of the classes was ferocious. Indeed, all Europe
was soon to see barricades in every city, and thrones and
governments tumbling into apparent ruin. Yet in the
midst of all this wild confusion, and even touching el-
bows with the leaders of these revolutionary storms,
Marx and Engels outlined in clear, simple, and powerful

342

VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

language the nature of capitalism — what it was, how it
came into being, and what it was yet destined to be-
come. They pointed out that it was not individual em-
ployers or individual statesmen or the Government or
even kings and princes who were responsible for the evils
of society, but that unemployment, misery, and oppres-
sion were due to an economic system, and that so long
as capitalism existed the mass of humanity would be sunk
in poverty. They called attention to the long evolutionary
processes that had been necessary to change the .entire
world from a state of feudalism into a state of capitalism;
and how it was not due to man's will-power that the
great industrial revolution occurred, but to the growth of
machines, of steam, and of electrical power; and that it
was these that have made the modern world, with its
intense and terrible contrasts of riches and of poverty.
They also pointed out that little individual owners of
property were giving way to joint-stock companies, and
that these would in turn give way to even greater aggre-
gations of capital. An economic law was driving the
big capitalists to eat up the little capitalists. It was
forcing them to take from the workers their hand tools
and to drive them out of their home workshops ; it was
forcing them also to take from the small property owners
their little properties and to appropriate the wealth of the
world into their own hands. As a result of this eco-
nomic process, "private property," they said, "is already
done away with for nine-tenths of the population." (s)
But they also pointed out that capitalism had within itself
the seeds of its own dissolution, that it was creating
a new class, made up of the overwhelming majority, that
was destined in time to overthrow capitaUsm. "What the
bourgeoisie therefore produces, above all, are its own
grave diggers." (6) In the interest of society the nine-

VISIONS OF VICTORY 343

tenths would force the one-tenth to yield up its private
property, that is to say, its "power to subjugate the labor
of others." (7)

Taking their stand on this careful analysis of historic
progress and of economic evolution, they viewed with
contempt the older fighting methods of the revolutionists,
and turned their vials of satire and wrath upon Her-
wegh, Willich, Schapper, Kinkel, Ledru-Rollin, Bakou-
nin, and all kinds and species of revolution-makers.
They deplored incendiarism, machine destruction, and all
the purely retaliative acts of the laborers. They even
ridiculed the general strike.* And, while for thirty years
they assailed anarchists, terrorists, and direct-actionists,
they never lost an opportunity to impress upon the work-
ers of Europe the only possible method of effectually
combating capitalism. There must first be unity — world-
wide, international unity — among all the forces of labor.
And, secondly, all the energies of a united labor move-
ment must be centered upon the all-important contest
for control of political power. They fought incessantly
with their pens to bring home the great truth that
every class struggle is a political struggle; and, while
they were working to emphasize that fact, they began in
1864 actually to organize the workers of Europe to fight
that struggle. The first great practical vvork of the In-
ternational was to get votes for workingmen. It* was
the chief thought and labor of Marx during the first

*"The general strike," Engels said, "is in Bakounin's pro-
gram the lever which must be applied in order to inaugurate the
social revolution. . . . The proposition is far from being
new; some French socialists, and, after them, some Belgian
socialists have since 1848 shown a partiality for riding this
beast of parade." This appeared in a series of articles written
for Der Volksstaaf in 1873 and republished in the pamphlet
"Bakunisten an der Arbeit."

344 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

years of that organization to win for the English workers
the suffrage, while in Germany all his followers — includ-
ing Lassalle as well as Bebel and Liebknecht — labored
throughout the sixties to that end. Up to the present the
main work of the socialist movement throughout the
world has been to fight for, and its main achievement to -
obtain, the legal weapons essential for its battles.

Let us try to grasp the immensity of the task actually
executed by Marx. First, consider his scientific work.
During all the period of these many battles every leisure
moment was spent in study. While others were engaged
in organizing what they were pleased to call the "Revolu-
tion" and waiting about for it to start, Marx, Engels,
Liebknecht, and all this group were spending innumerable
hours in the library. We see the result of that labor in
the three great volumes of "Capital,'^ in many pamphlets,
and in other writings. By this painstaking scientific work
of Marx the nature of capitalism was made known and,
consequently, what it was that should be combated, and
how the battle should be waged. In addition to these
studies, which have been of such priceless value to the
labor and socialist movements of the world, Marx, by his
pitiless logic and incessant warfare, destroyed every revo-
lution-maker, and then, by an act of surgery that many
declared would prove fatal, cut out of the labor move-
merit the "pan-destroyers." Once more, by a supreme
effort, he turned the thought of labor throughout the
world to the one end and aim of winning its political
weapons, of organizing its political armies, and of uniting
the working classes of all lands. Here, then, is a brief
summary of the work of this genius, who fertilized with
his powerful thoughts the proletarian movements of both
worlds. The most wonderful thing of all is that, in his
brief lifetime, he should not only have planned this gigan-

VISIONS OF VICTORY 345

tic task, but that he should have obtained the essentials
for its complete accomplishment.

And, as we look out upon the world to-day, we find
it actually a different world, almost a new world. The
present-day conflict between capital and labor has no
more the character of the guerilla warfare of half a
century ago. It is now a struggle between immense
organizations of capital and immense organizations of
labor. And not only has there been a revolution in ideas
concerning the natufe of capitalism but there has been
as a consequence a revolution in the methods of combat
between labor and capital. While all the earlier and
more brutal forms of warfare are still used, the conflict
as a whole is to-day conducted on a different plane.
The struggle of the classes is no longer a vague, unde-
fined, and embittered battle. It is no longer merely a
contest between the violent of both classes. It is now
a deliberate, and largely legal, tug-of-war between two
great social categories over the ends of a social revolution
that both are beginning to recognize as inevitable. The
representative workers to-day understand capitalism, and
labor now faces capital with a program, clear, comprehen-
sive, world-changing; with an international army of so
many millions that it is almost past contending with;
while its tactics and methods of action can neither be
assailed nor effectively combated. From one end of the
earth to the other we see capital with its gigantic asso-
ciations of bankers, merchants, manufacturers, mine own-
ers, and mill owners striving to forward and to protect
its economic interests. On the other hand, we see labor
with its millions upon millions of organized men all but
united and solidified under the flag of international
socialism.

And, most strange and wondrous of all — ^as a result of

346 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

the logic of things and of the logic of Marx — the actual
positions of the two classes have been completely trans-
posed. Marx persuaded the workers to take up a weapon
which they alone can use. Like Siegfried, they have
taken the fragments of a sword and welded them into
a mighty weapon — so mighty, indeed, that the working
class alone, with its innumerable millions, is capable of,
wielding it. The workers are the only class in society
with the numerical strength to become the majority and
the only class which, by unity and organization, can ent
ploy the suffrage effectively. While fifty years ago the
workers had every legal and peaceable means denied-
them, to-day they are the only class which can assuredly
profit through legal and peaceable means. It is obvious
that the beneficiaries of special privilege can hope to re-
tain their power only so long as the working class is'
divided and too ignorant to recognize its own interests.
As soon as its eyes open, the privileged classes must lose
its political support and, with that political support, every-
thing else. That is absolutely inevitable. The interests
of mass and class are too fundamentally opposed to per-
mit of permanent political harmony. ^— ^
Nobody sees this more clearly than the intelligent capi-
talist. As the workers become more and more conscious
of their collective power and more and more convinced
that through solidarity they can quietly take possession
of the world, their opponents become increasingly con-
scious of their growing weakness, and already in Europe
there is developing a kind of upper-class syndicalism, that
despairs of Parliaments, deplores the bungling work of
politics, and ridicules the general incompetence of demo-
cratic institutions. At the same time, however, they
exercise stupendous efforts, in the most devious and
questionable ways, to retain their political power. Facing

VISIONS OF VICTORY 347

the inevitable, and realizing that potentially at least the
suffrages of the immense majority stand over them as a
menace, they are beginning to seek other methods of
action. Of course, in all the more democratic countries
the power of democracy has already made itself felt, and
in America, at any rate, the powerful have long had re-
sort to bribery, corruption, and all sorts of political con-
spiracy in order to retain their power. Much as we may
deplore the debauchery of public servants, it nevertheless
yields us a certain degree of satisfaction, in that it is elo-
quent testimony of this agreeable fact, that the oldest
anarchists are losing their control over the State. They
hold their sway over it more and more feebly, and even
when the State is entirely obedient to their will, it is
not infrequently because they have temporarily purchased
that power. When the manufacturers, the trusts, and the
beneficiaries of special privilege generally are forced pe-
riodically to go out and purchase the State from the
Robin Hoods of politics, when they are compelled to
finance lavishly every political campaign, and then ab-
jectly go to the very men whom their money has put
into power and buy them again, their bleeding misery
becomes an object of pity.

This really amounts to an almost absolute transposition
of the classes. In the early nineties Engels saw the
beginning of this change, and, in what Sombart rightly
says tnay be looked upon as a kind of "political last will
and testament" to the movement, Engels writes: "The
time for small minorities to place themselves at the head
of the ignorant masses and resort to force in order to
bring about revolutions is gone. A complete change in
the organization of society can be brought about only by
the conscious cooperation of the masses; they must be
alive to the aim in view; they must know what they

348 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

want. The history of the last fifty years has taught
that. But, if the masses are to understand the line of
action that is necessary, we must work hard and con-
tinuously to bring it home to them. That, indeed, is
what we are now engaged upon, and our success is
driving our opponents to despair. The irony of destiny
is turning everything topsy-turvy. We, the 'revolution-
aries,' are profiting more by lawful than by unlawful and
revolutionary means. The parties of order, as they call
themselves, are being slowly destroyed by their own
weapons. Their cry is that of Odilon Barrot: 'Lawful
means are killing us.' . . . We, on the contrary, are
thriving on them, our muscles are strong, and our cheeks
are red, and we look as though we intend to live for-
ever!" (8)

And if lawful means are killing them, so are science
and democracy. We no longer live in an age when any
suggestion of change is deemed a sacrilege. The period
has gone by when political, social, and industrial institu-
tions are supposed to be unalterable. No one believes
them fashioned by Divinity, and there is nothing so sacred
in the worldly affairs of men that it cannot be ques-
tioned. There is no law, or judicial decision, or decree,
or form of property, or social status that cannot be criti-
cally examined; and, if men can agree, none is so firmly
established that it cannot be changed. It is agreed that
men shall be allowed to speak, write, and propagate their
views on all questions, whether religious, political, or
industrial. In theory, at least, all authority, law, admin-
istrative institutions, and property relations are decided
ultimately in the court of the people. Through their
press these things may be discussed. On their platform
these things may be approved or denounced. In their
assemblies there is freedom to make any declaration

VISIONS OF VICTORY 349

for or against things as they are. And through their
votes and representatives there is not one institution that
cannot be molded, changed, or even abolished. Upon
this theory modern society is held together. It is a belief
so firmly rooted in the popular mind that, although every-
thing goes against the people, they peacefully submit.
So firmly established, indeed, is this tradition that even
the most irate admit that where wrong exists the chief
fault lies with the people themselves.

Whatever may be said concerning its limitations and
its perversions, this, then, is an age of democracy,
founded upon a widespread faith in majority rule.
Whether it be true or not, the conviction is almost uni-
versal that the majority can, through its political power,
accomplish any and every change, no matter how revo-
lutionary. Our whole Western civilization has had bred
into it the belief that those who are dissatisfied with
things as they are can agitate to change them, are even
free to organize for the purpose of changing them, and
can, in fact, change them whenever the majority is won
over to stand with them. This, again, is the theory, al-
though there is no one of us, of course, but will admit
that a thousand ways are found to defeat the will of
the majority. There are bribery, fraudulent elections, and
an infinite variety of corrupting methods. There is the
control of parliaments, of courts, and of political parties
by special privilege. There are oppressive and unjust
laws obtained through trickery. There is the over-
whelming power exercised by the wealthy through their
control of the press and of nearly all means of enlight-
enment. Through their power and the means they have
to corrupt, the majority is indeed so constantly deceived
that, when one dwells only on this side of our political
life, it is easy to arrive at the conviction that democracy

3SO VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

is a myth and that, in fact, the end may never come of
this power of the few to divert and pervert the institu-
tions for expressing the popular will.

But there is no way of achieving democracy in any
form except through democracy, and we have found that
he who rejects political action finds himself irresistibly
drawn into the use of means that are both indefensible
and abortive. Curiously enough, in this use of methods,
as in other ways, extremes meet. Both the despot and
the terrorist are anti-democrats. Neither the anarchist
of Bakounin's type nor the anarchist of the Wall Street
type trusts the people. With their cliques and inner
circles plotting their conspiracies, they are forced to travel
the same subterranean passages. The one through cor-
ruption impresses the will of the wealthy and powerful
upon the community. The other hopes that by some dash
upon authority a spirited, daring, and reckless minority
can overturn existing society and establish a new socjal
order. The method of the political boss, the aristocrat,
the self-seeker, the monopolist — even in the use of thugs,
private armies, spies, and provocateurs — differs little
from the methods proposed by Bakounin in his Alliance.
And it is not in the least strange that much of the law-
lessness and violence of the last half-century has had its
origin in these two sources. In all the unutterably des-^
picable work of detective agencies and police spies that
has led to the destruction of property, to riots and minor
rebellions that have cost the lives of many thousands in
recent decades, we find the sordid materialism of special
privilege seeking to gain its secret ends. In all the un-
utterably tragic work of the terrorists that has cost so
many lives we find the rage and despair of self-styled
revolutionists seeking to gain their secret ends. After
all, it matters little whether the aim of a group of' con-

VISIONS OF VICTORY 351

\spirators is purely selfish or wholly altruistic. It matters
mtle whether their program is to build into a system
private monopoly or to save the world from that monop-
oly. Their methods outrage democracy, even when they,
are not actually criminal. The oldest anarchist believes
that the people must be deceived into a worse social
order, and that at least is a tribute to their intelligence.
On the other hand, the Bakouninists, old and new, believe
that the people must be deceived into a better social
order, and that is founded upon their complete distrust 1
of the people.

And, rightly enough, the attitude of the masses toward
the secret and conspiratory methods of both the idealist
anarchist and the materialist anarchist is the same. If
the latter distrust the people, the people no less distrust
them. If the masses would mob the terrorist who springs
forth to commit some fearful act, the purpose of which
they cannot in the least understand, they would, if
possible, also mob the individual responsible for manipu-
lation of elections, for the buying of legislatures, and for
the purchasing of court decisions. They fear, distrust,
and denounce the terrorist who goes forth to commit ar-
son, pillage, or assassination no less than the anarchist
who purchases private armies, hires thugs to beat up
unoffending citizens, and uses the power of wealth to
undermine the Government. In one sense, the acts of
the materialist anarchist are clearer even than those of
the other. The people know the ends sought by the
powerful. On the other hand, the ends sought by the
terrorist are wholly mysterious; he has not even taken
the trouble to make his program clear. We find, then,
that the anarchist of high finance, who would suppress
democracy in the interest of a new feudalism, and
the anarchist of a sect, who would override democracy

352 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

in the hope of communism, are classed together in the
popular mind. The man who in this day deifies the in-
dividual or the sect, and would make the rights of the
individual or the sect override the rights of the many,
is battling vainly against the supreme current of the
age.

Democracy may be a myth. Yet of all the faiths of
our time none is more firmly grounded, none more
warmly cherished. If any man refuses to abide by the
decisions of democracy and takes his case out of that
court, he ranges against himself practically the entire
populace. On the other hand, the man who takes his
case to that court is often forced to suffer for a long
time humiliating defeats. If the case be a new one but
little understood, there is no place where a hearing seems
so hard to win as in exactly that court. Universal suf-
frage, by which such cases are decided, appears to the
man with a new idea as an obstacle almost overwhelming.
He must set out on a long and dreary road of education
and of organization; he must take his case before a
jury made up of untold millions; he must wait maybe
for centuries to obtain a majority. To go into this great
open court and plead an entirely new cause requires a
courage that is sublime and convictions that have the
intensity of a religion. One who possesses any doubt
cannot begin a task so gigantic, and certainly one who,
for any reason, distrusts the people cannot, of course, put
his case in that court. It was with full realization of
the difficulties, of the certainty of repeated defeats, and
of the overwhelming power against them that the social-
ists entered this great arena to fight their battle. Univer-
sal suffrage is a merciless thing. How often has it served
the purpose of stripping the socialist naked and exposing
him to a terrible humiliation! Again and again, in the

VISIONS OF VICTORY 353

history of the last fifty years, have the socialists, after
tremendous agitation, gigantic mass meetings, and wide-
spread social unrest, marched their followers to the polls
with results positively pitiful. A dozen votes out of
thousands have in more cases than one marked their
relative power. There is no other example in the world
of such faith, courage, and persistence in politics as that
of the socialists, who, despite defeat after defeat, humilia-
tion after humiliation, have never lost hope, but on every
occasion, in every part of the modern world, have gone
up again and again to be knocked down by that jury.
And let it be said to their credit that never once any-'
where have the socialists despaired of democracy. "So-
cialism and democracy . . . belong to each other,
round out each other, and can never stand in contradic-
tion to each other. Socialism without democracy is
pseudo-socialism, just as democracy zvithout socialism is
pseudo-democracy. The democratic state is the only pos-
sible form of a socialised society." (9) The insepag-
bleness of democracy and socialism has served the or-
ganized movement as an unerring guide at every moment
of its struggle for existence and of its fight against the
ruling powers. It has served to keep its soul free from
that cynical distrust of the people which is evident in
the writings of the anarchists and of the syndicalists — in
Bakounin, Nechayeff, Sorel, Berth, and Pouget. It has
also served to keep it from those emotional reactions
which have led nearly every great leader of the direct-
actionists in the last century to become in the end an
apostate. Feargus O'Connor, Joseph Rayner Stephens,
the fierce leaders of Chartism ; Bakounin, Blanc, Richard,
Jaclard, Andrieux, Bastelica, the flaming revolutionists of
the Alliance; Briand, Sorel, Berth, the leading propa-
.gandists and philosophers of modern syndicalism ; every

354 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

one of them turned in despair from the movement. Cob-
den, Bonaparte, Clemenceau, the Empire, the "hew mon-
archy," or a comfortable berth, claimed in the end every
one of these impatient middle-class intellectuals, who
never had any real understanding of the actual labor
movement. And, if the union of democracy and social-
ism has saved the movement from reactions such as
these, it has also saved it from the desperation that gives
birth to individual methods, such as the Propaganda of
the Deed and sabotage. That is what the inseparableness
of democracy and socialism has done for the movement
in the past; and it has in it an even greater service yet
to perform. It has the power of salvation for society
itself in the not remote future, when it will be face to
face, throughout the world, with an irresistible current
toward State socialism. Industrial democracy and politi-
cal democracy are indissolubly united ; their union cannot
be sundered except at the cost of destruction to them
both.

In adopting, then, the methods of education, of organi-.
zation, and of political action the socialists rest their case
upon the decision of democracy. They accept the weap-
ons that civilization has put into their hands, and they
are testing the word of kings and of parliaments that
democracy can, if it wishes, alter the bases of society.
And in no small measure this is the secret of their im-
mense strength and of their enormous growth. There
is nothing strange in the fact that the socialists stand
almost alone to-day faithful to democracy. It simply
means that they believe in it even for themselves, that
is to say, for the working class. They believe in it for
industry as well as for politics, and, if they are at war
with the political despot, they are also at war with the
industrial despot. Everyone is a socialist and a demo-

VISIONS OF VICTORY 355

crat within his circle. No capitalist objects to a group
of capitalists cooperatively owning a great railroad. The
fashionable clubs of both city and country are almost
perfect examples of group socialism. They are owned
cooperatively and conducted for the benefit of all the
members. Even some reformers are socialists in this
measure — that they believe it would be well for the com-
munity to own public utilities, provided skilled, trained,
honorable men, like themselves, are permitted to conduct
them. Indeed, the only democracy or socialism that is
seriously combated is that which embraces the most
numerous and most useful class in society, "the only class
that is not a class"; (10) the only class so numerous
that it "cannot effect its emancipation without delivering
all society from its division into classes." (11)

In any case, here it is, "the self-conscious, inde-
pendent movement of the immense majority, in the inter-
est of the immense majority," (12) already with its eleven
million voters and its fifty million souls. It has slowly,
patiently, painfully toiled up to a height where it is be-
ginning to see visions of victory. It has faith in itself and
in its cause. It believes it has the power of deliverance
for all society and for all humanity. It does not ex-
pect the powerful to have faith in it ; but, as Jesus came
out of despised Nazareth, so the new world is coming
out of the multitude, amid the toil and sweat and an-
guish of the mills, mines, and factories of the world. It
has endured much; suffered ages long of slavery and
serfdom. From being mere animals of production, the
workers have become the "hands" of production; and
they are now reaching out to become the masters of
production. And, while in other periods of the world
their intolerable misery led them again and again to
strike out in a kind of torrential anarchy that pulled

3S6 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

down society itself, they have in our time, for the first
time in the history of the world, patiently and persist-
ently organized themselves into a world power. Where
shall we find in all history another instance of the organi-
zation in less thanhalf a century of eleven million people
into a compact force for the avowed purpose of peace-
fully and legally taking possession of the world? They
have refused to hurry. They have declined all short cuts.
They have spurned violence. The "bourgeois democrats,"
the terrorists, and the syndicalists, each in their time, have
tried to point out a shorter, quicker path. The workers
have refused to listen to them. On the other hand,
they have declined the way of compromise, of fusions,
and of alliances, that have also promised a quicker and
a shorter road to power. With the most maddening pa-
tience they have declined to take any other path than
their own — ^thus infuriating not only the terrorists in their
own ranks but those Greeks from the other side who
came to them bearing gifts. Nothing seems to disturb
them or to block their path. They are ofifered reforms
and concessions, which they take blandly, but without
thanks. They simply move on and on, with the terrible,
incessant, irresistible power of some eternal, natural
force. They have been fought; yet they have never lost
a single great battle. They have been flattered and ca-
joled, without ever once anywhere being appeased. They
have been provoked, insulted, imprisoned, calumniated,
and repressed. They are indifferent to it all. They
simply move on and on — with the patience and the meek-
ness of a people with the vision that they are soon to
inherit the earth.

AUTHORITIES

CHAPTER I

(i) Macaulay, Critical, Historical, and Miscellaneous Essays:
The Earl of Chatham, p. 3.

(2) Bdkounin, CEuvres, Vol. Ill, p. 21. (P. V. Stock, Paris,

1912-1913.)

(3) Idem, Vol. II, p. xiv.

(4) Idem, Vol. II, p. xlvii.

(5) L'Alliance de la Democratie Socialiste et I' Association In-

ternationale des Travailleurs, p. 121. (Secret Statutes
of the Alliance.) A. Darson, London, and Otto Meissner,
Hamburg, 1873.

(6) Idem, p. 125. (Secret Statutes of the Alliance.)

(7) Idem, p. 128. (Secret Statutes of the Alliance.)

(8) Idem, p. 11. (The Secret Alliance.)

(9) Idem, p. 129. (Secret Statutes of the Alliance.)

(10) Bakounin, op. cit., Vol.' II, p. viii.

(11) L'Alliance, etc., p. 95.

(12) Bakounin, op. cit.. Vol. II, p. viii.

(13) Idem, Vol. II, p. xxiii.

(14) Quoted in L'Alliance, etc., p. 112.
(is) Idem, p. 117.

(16) L'Alliance, etc., p. 129. (Secret Statutes of the Alliance.)

(17) Idem, pp. 128-129. (Secret Statutes of the Alliance.)

(18) Idem, p. 132. (Secret Statutes of the Alliance.)

(ig) Cf. Guillaume, L' Internationale; documents et souvenirs
(1864-1878). Vol. I, p. 131. (fidouard Cornely et Cie.,
Paris, igos-1910.)

(20) Cf. Idem, Vol. I, pp. 132-133. for entire program.

(21) Bakounin, op. cit.. Vol. V, p. 53.

(22) L'Alliance, etc., pp. 64-65.

(23) Idem, p. 65 (quotations from The Principles of the Revo-

lution) .

357

358 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

(24) Idem, p. 66 (The Principles of the Revolution).

(25) Idem, p. 68 (The Principles of the Revolution).

(26) Idem, pp. 90-92.

(27) Idem, pp. 93-94.

(28) Idem, pp. 94-95.

(29) Idem, p. 95.

(30) Guillaume, op. cit. Vol. II, p. 60.

(31) Idem, Vol. II, pp. 61-63.

(32) Idem, Vol. Ill, p. 312.

CHAPTER II

(i) Guillaume, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 90.

(2) Lefrangais, Memoires d'un revolutionnaire, p. 348 (Paris).

(3) Guillaume, op. cit.. Vol. II, p. 92 (Oscar Testut).

(4) Idem, Vol. II, p. 92.

(5) Idem, Vol. II, p. 93.

(6) Idem, Vol. II, pp. 94-95.

(7) Idem, Vol. II, p. 96.

(8) Idem, Vol. II, p. 96.

(9) Idem, Vol. II, p. 96.

(10) Idem, Vol. II, p. 97.

(11) Idem, Vol. II, p. 97.

(12) Idem, Vol. II, p. 97.

(13) Idem, Vol. II, pp. 98-99.

(14) Idem, Vol. II, p. 98.

(15) Quoted by Idem, Vol. II, p. loi. Cf. The Social Demo-

crat, April IS, 1903.

(16) L' Alliance, etc., p. 21.

(17) Marx, The Commune of Paris (Bax's translation), p. 123.

(Twentieth Century Press, Ltd., London, 1895.)

(18) Guillaume, op. cit.. Vol. Ill, p. 100.

(19) Idem, Vol. Ill, p. 98.

(20) Bakunisten an der Arbeit, I, by Frederick Engels, printed

in Der Volksstaat, October 31, 1873, No. 105.

(21) Quoted by Guillaume, op. cit.. Vol. Ill, p. 154.

(22) Idem, Vol. Ill, p. 100.

(23) Idem, Vol. Ill, p. 204.

(24) Idem, Vol. Ill, p. 207.

(25) Idem, Vol. Ill, p. 208.

AUTHORITIES 359

(26) Idem, Vol. Ill, p. 186.

(27) Idem, Vol. Ill, p. 186.

(28) Idem, Vol. Ill, p. 146.

(29) Idem, Vol. Ill, p. 237.

CHAPTER III

(i) Kropotkin, Memoirs of a Revolutionist, p. 394. (Hough-
ton, Mifflin & Co., Boston, i8gg.)

(2) Idem, p. 287.

(3) Guillaume, op. cit.. Vol. IV, pp. 113-114.

(4) Idem, Vol. IV, p. 225.

(5) Idem, Vol. IV, p. 225.

(6) Idem, Vol. IV, p. 226.

(7) Kropotkin, Paroles d'un revolte, pp. 285-288 (E. Flam-

marion, Paris, 1885).

(8) U Alliance, etc., p. 65 (The Principles of the Revolution).

(9) Prolo, Les Anarchistes, pp. 14-15 (Marcel Riviere et Cie.,

Paris, 1912) ; or Guillaume, op. cit.. Vol. IV, pp. 160-168.

(10) Prolo, op. cit., pp. 15-17; or Guillaume, op. cit. Vol. IV,

pp. 184-188.

(11) Bebel, My Life, p. 330 (Chicago University Press, 1912).

(12) Zenker, Anarchism: A Criticism and History of the An-

archist Theory, p. 282 (G. P. Putnam's Sons, New
York, 1901).

(13) Idem, pp. 294-295.

(14) Kropotkin, op. cit., pp. 448-449.
, (is) Zenker, op. cit., p. 286.

CHAPTER IV

(i) Guillaume, op. cit.. Vol. IV, p. 209.

(2) Idem, Vol. IV, p. 227.

(3) Quoted by Zenker, op. cit., pp. 235-236.

(4) Zenker, op. cit., pp. 282-283.

(5) Emma Goldman, Anarchism and Other Essays, p. 47

(Mother Earth Publishing Co., New York, 1911).

(6) Quoted in History of Socialism in the United States, p.

360 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

219 -(Funk & Wagnalls, New York, 1910), by Morris
Hillquit, who gives a fuller acount of this period.

(7) Quoted by Ely, The Labor Movement in America, p. 362

(Thomas Y. Crowell, New York, 3d ed., 1910).

(8) Idem, p. 263.

(9) The Chicago Martyrs, p. 30 (Free Society Publishing Co.,

San Francisco, 1899).

(10) Reprinted in Instead of a Book, by Benjamin R. Tucker,

pp. 429-432 (Benj. R. Tucker, New York, 1897).

(11) Idem, p. 429.

(12) Bebel, My Life, p. 237.

(13) Alexander Berkman, Prison Memoirs of an Anarchist,

p. 7 (Mother Earth Publishing Company, New York,
1912).

CHAPTER V

(i) Quoted by Prolo, Les Anarchistes, p. 44.

(2) Prolo, op. cit., p. 45.

(3) Quoted from L'&clair by Prolo, op. cit., p. 46.

(4) Quoted by Prolo, op. cit., p. 47.

(5) Quoted by Idem, p. 47.

(6) Quoted by Idem, p. 47.

(7) Emma Goldman, Anarchism and Other Essays, p. lOl.

(8) Idem, pp. gg-ioo.

(9) Idem, pp. 102-103.

(10) Prolo, op. cit.^-p. 52.

(11) Idem, pp. 54-^5.

(12) Pall Mall Gazette, April 29, 1912.

CHAPTER VI

(i) Emma Goldman, op. cit., p. 98.

(2) Idem, p. 113.

(3) Idem, pp. H3-114.

(4) Percy Bysshe Shelley, Julian and Maddalo.

(5) Idem.

(6) Angiolillo, quoted by Goldman, op. cit., pp. 104-105.

AUTHORITIES 361

(7) Goldman, op. cit., p. 103.

(8) The Chicago Martyrs, p. 30.

(9) Alfred Tennyson, The Vision of Sin, IV.

(10) Lombroso, Les Anarchist es, pp. 184, 181-183, ig6 (Flam-

marion, Paris, 1896).

(11) Idem, pp. 205-207.

(12) Quoted by Lombroso, op. cit., p. 207.

(13) Zenker, op. cit., pp. 306-307.

(14) Bebel, Attentate und Sosialdemokratie, p. 6, a speech de-

livered at Berlin, November 2, 1898 {Vorw'drts, Berlin,
190S).
(is) The Chicago Martyrs, p. 130.

(16) Idem, p. 16.

(17) Idem, p. 62.

(18) Max Stirner, The Ego and His Own, p. 477 (A. C. Fi-

field, London, 1912).

(19) Idem, p. 425.

(20) Idem, p. 394.

(21) Lombroso, Op. cit., pp. 52-54.

(22) Marx and Engels, The Communist Manifesto, p. 29 (C. H.

Kerr & Co., Chicago, 1906).

(23) Reprinted in Guesde's Quatre ans de lutte des classes, pp.

88-91 (G. Jacques et Cie., Paris, 1901).

(24) Idem, 1). 92.

(25) Bebel, Attentate und Sosialdemokratie, pp. 12-14.

(26) Idem, p. I.

(27) Goldman, Anarchism and Other Essays, pp. 92-93.

(28) Idem, pp. 85-86.

(29) This is a translation of an editorial that has appeared in

various foreign newspapers and also, it is said, in the
Illinois Staats-Zeitung ; Cf. De Leon, Socialism versus
Anarchism, p. 61 (Nevir York Labor News Company,
New York).

CHAPTER VII

(i) L' Alliance de la Democratie Socialiste, etc., p. 48.

(2) George Brandes, Main Currents in Nineteenth Century

Literature, Vol. VI (The Macmillan Company, New

York, 1906).

362 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

(3) Engels in the introduction to Revelations sur le Proces des

Communistes, published together with, and under the
title of, Marx's L'Allemagne en 1848, p. 268 (Schleicher
Freres, Paris, 1901).

(4) Idem, p. 268.

(5) Idem, pp. 268-269. My italics.
(■6) Idem, pp. 269-270.

(7) Communist Manifesto, p. 12.

(8) Idem, p. 44-

(9) Idem, p. 15.

(10) Idem, p. 25.

(11) Idem, p. 25.

(12) Idem, p. 26.

(13) Idem, p. 30.

(14) Idem, p. 44.
(is) Idem, pp. 42, 46.

(16) Engels, op. cit., p. 287.

(17) Idem, p. 287.

(18) Quoted by Engels in op. cit., p. 297.

(19) Albion W. Small, Socialism in the Lightfcf Social Science,

reprinted from the American lournal of Sociology, Vol.
XVII, No. 6 (May, 1912), p. 810.

(20) Communist Manifesto, pp. 12, 13.

(21) Albion W. Small, article cited, p. 812.

(22) Idem, p. 812.

(23) Address and Provisional Rules of the International Work-

ing Men's Association (London, 1864), p. 12.

(24) Letter of Marx's of October 9, 1866, published in the Neue

Zeit, April 12, 1902.

(25) Address and Provisional Rules of the International Work-

ing Men's Association (London, 1864), p. 9.

(26) Idem, p. 9.

(27) Idem, p. 10.

(28) Idem, p. II.

(29) Engels, op. cit., p. 287.

(30) Ma.Tx, L'Allemagne en 1848, p. 188.

(31) Letter of October 9, 1866, published in the Neue Zeit, April

12, 1902.

(32) Quoted by Jaeckh, The International, p. 32 (Twentieth

Century Press, Ltd., London).

AUTHORITIES 363

(33) Nicolay and Hay, Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln,

Vol. X, p. S3 (Francis D. Tandy Co., New York). My
italics.

(34) Jaures, Studies in Socialism, p. 133 (G. P. Putnam's Sons,

New York, 1906, translated by Mildred Minturn).

CHAPTER VIII

(i) Bakounin, CEuvres, Vol. II, p. viii.

(2) Idem, Vol. II, pp. xi-xii.

(3) L'Allemagne en 1848, p. 279.

(4) Liebknecht, Karl Marx: Biographical Memoirs, pp. 62-63

(C. H. Kerr, Chicago, 1904).

(5) Bakounin, op. cit., Vol. II, p. xvii.

(6) Cf. Marx, Revolution and Counter-Revolution, p. 126

(Scribner's, New York, 1896).

(7) Bakounin, op. cit, Vol. II, p. xx.

(8) Idem, Vol. IV, p. 383.

(9) Guillaume, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 103.

(10) Idem, Vol. I, p. 103.

(11) Compte-Rendu of the Fourth International Congress of

the International Working Men's Association, Basel,
1869, pp. 6-7 (Bruxelles, 1869).

(12) Idem, p. 7.

(13) Guillaume, op. cit.. Vol. I, p. 202.

(14) I am following here the English version, published by the

General Council, pp. 26-27.
(is) Compte-Rendu of the Fourth International Congress of
the International Working Men's Association, pp. 85-86.

(16) Idem, p. 89.

(17) Idem, pp. 144-145-

(18} Guillaume, op. cit. Vol. I, p. 204.

(19) Quoted bf Bakounin, op. cit. Vol. V, p. 223.

(20) Bakounin, op. cit.. Vol. V, p. 232.

(21) Idem, Vol. V, p. 233.

(22) Idem, Vol. V, pp. 234-235.

(23) Idem, Vol. I, pp. xxxii-xxxiii.

(24) Idem, Vol. IV, p. 62.

(25) Communist Manifesto, p. 44.

364 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

(26) Engels, Socialism, Utopian and Scientific, pp. 69-70 (Scrib-

ner's. New York, 1892).

(27) Idem, pp. 71-72. Italics mine.

(28) Idem, p. 86.

(29) Idem, pp. 86-87.

(30) Idem, pp. 76-77-

(31) Compte-Rendu of the Fourth International Congress of

the International Working Men's Association, p. 86.

(32) Bakounin, op. cit. Vol. IV, pp. 31-32.

(33) Idem, Vol. IV, p. 32.

(34) Idem, Vol. IV, p. 32-

(35) Idem, Vol. IV, p. 37-

(36) Idem, Vol. IV, p. 39.

(37) Idem, Vol. IV, p. 40.

(38) Idem, Vol. IV, p. 59-

(39) Idem, Vol. IV, pp. 191-192.

(40) Idem, Vol. Ill, p. 3i-

(41) Idem, Vol. Ill, p. 40.

(42) Idem, Vol. Ill, p. 72.

(43) Idem, Vol. IV, p. 415.

(44) Idem, Vol. VI, p. 38.

(45) Idem, Vol. VI, pp. 38-39.

(46) Idem, Vol. IV, pp. 438-439-

(47) Idem, Vol. VI, p. 75.

(48) Engels, Landmarks of Scientific Socialism, p. 190 (Kerr,

Chicago, 1907).

(49) Idem, p. 186.
(so) Idem, pp. 184-185.

(51) Idem, p. igo. My italics.

(52) Resolutions of the Conference of Delegates of the In-

ternational Working Men's Association, Assembled at
London from the 17th to the 23d of September, 1871,
No. IX (London, 1871).

CHAPTER IX

(1) L'Alliance de la Democratie Socialiste, etc., p. 12.

(2) Bakounin, CEwvres, Vol. IV, p. 342.

(3) Cf. Compte-Rendu OfUciel of the Geneva Congress, 1873,
p. SI (Locle, 1873).

AUTHORITIES 365

(4) Idem, pp. 55-56.

(5) Idem, p. 86.

(6) Idem, p. 87.

(7) Idem, p. 85.

(8) Idem, p. 35.

(9) Guillaume, op. cit., Vol. Ill, p. 118.

(10) Plechanoff, Anarchism and Socialism, p. 84 (The Twen-

tieth Century Press, Ltd., London, 1906; trans, by Elea-
nor Marx Aveling).

(11) Guillaume, op. cit, Vol. IV, pp. 114-115.

(12) Idem, Vol. IV, p. 115.

(13) Idem, Vol. IV, pp. 223-224.

(14) Dawson, German Socialism and Ferdinand Lassalle, p. 169,

(Scribner's Sons, New York, 1899).

(15) Ferdinand Lassalle, Reden und Schriften, Vol. II, pp. 543-
544 (Vorwdrts, Berlin, 1893).

(16) Idem, Vol. II, p. 383.

(17) Idem, Vol. II, p. 22.

(18) Idem, Vol. II, p. 104.

(19) Quoted by Dawson, op. cit., p. 187.

(20) Idem, p. 168; Cf. also, Bernstein, Ferdinand Lassalle as

a Social Reformer, pp. 167-170 (Scribner's Sons, New
York, 1893).

(21) Quoted by Dawson, .op. cit., p. 168.

(22) Quoted by Milhaud, La Democratie socialiste allemande,
p. 32 (Felix Alcan, Paris, 1903).

(23) Idem, pp. 32-33-

(24) Idem, p. 41.

(25) Idem, p. 42.

(26) These sections are reduced from Dawson's summary in

op. cit, pp. 255-257.

(27) Quoted in Dawson, op. cit, p. 260.

(28) Bebel, Attentate und Sozialdemokratie, p. 2.

(29) ProtokoH of the Congress of the German Social-Democ-

racy, Wyden, 1880, p. 38 (Zurich, 1880).

(30) Idem, p. 42-

(31) Idem, p. 43-

(32) Quoted by Dawson, op. cit., p. 265.

(33) Speech in the Reichstag, March 21, 1884; quoted by Daw-

son, op. cit, pp. 268-269.

366 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

(34) Speech in the Reichstag, April 2, 1886; quoted by Daw-

son, op. cit, p. 271.

(35) Protokoll of the Proceedings of Party Conferences of the

German Social-Democracy, Erfurt, i8gi, p. 206 (Berlin,
1891).

CHAPTER X

(i) Quoted by Prolo, Les Anarchistes, p. 66.
(2) International Socialist Workers and Trade Union Con-
gress, London, i8g6, p. 31.
{3) Idem, p. 50.

(4) De Seilhac, Les Congres Ouvriers en France, p. 331 (Ar-

mand Colin et Cie., Paris, 1899).

(5) Idem, pp. 331-332.

(6) Compte-Rendu du Congres National Corporatif, Montpe-

lier, 1902.

(7) L'Alliance de la Democratie Socialiste, etc., pp. 48-49.

(8) Sombart, Socialism and the Socialist Movement, pp. 98-99

(E. P. Dutton & Co., New York, 1909; trans, from 6th
German edition).

(9) Louis Levine, The Labor Movement in France, p. 147

(Columbia University, New York, 1912).

(10) Arthur D. Lewis, Syndicalism and the General Strike,

p. 70 (T. Fisher Unwin, London, 1912).

(11) Berth, Les Nouveaux aspects du Socialisme, p. 36 (Marcel

Riviere et Cie., Paris, igo8).

(12) Robert Browning, Cleon.

(13) Sombart, op. cit., p. no.

(14) Compte-Rendu of the Seventh International Socialist Con-

gress, Stuttgart, 1907, p. 202.
(is) Cf. Compte-Rendu of the Sixth International Socialist
Congress, Amsterdam, 1904, p. 53.

(16) Levine, op. cit., p. 195.

(17) Compte-Rendu du Congris National Corporatif, Toulouse,

1910, p. 226.

(18) fitienne Buisson, La Greve Generate, p. 59 (Librairie

George Bellais, Paris, 1905).

(19) Labriola, Karl Marx, pp. 255-259 (Marcel Riviere et Cie.,

Paris, 1910).

AUTHORITIES 367

(20) Plechanoflf, Anarchism and Socialism, p. 63.

(21) Kampffmeyer, Changes in the Theory and Tactics of the

German Social Democracy, pp. 87-88 (C. H. Kerr, Chi-
cago, igo8);
(2a) Quoted in Kampffmeyer, op. cit., p. 88.

(23) Idem, p. 89.

(24) Quoted in Jaures, Studies in Socialism, pp. 75-76.

(25) Kautsky, Das Erfurter Programm, pp. 117-119 (8th Edi-

tion, Stuttgart, 1907) ; Cf. also The Socialist Republic,
by Kautsky, pp. lo-ii.

(26) Communist Manifesto, p. 15.

(27) Engels, Socialism, Utopian and Scientific, p. 76.

(28) Cf. Menger, The Right to the Whole Produce of Labor,

p. 117 (Macmillan & Co., London, 1899).

(29) Webb, The History of Trade Unionism, p. 145.

(30) Idem, p. 146.

(31) Quoted by Sombart, op. cit, p. 118.

(32) Sombart, op. cit., p. 118.

(33) Idem, p. 118.

(34) Marx, Revolution and Counter-Revolution, pp. 109-110.

(35) Compte-Rendu of the Fourth International Congress of the

International Working Men's Association, p. 88.

(36) Quoted by Plechanoff, op. cit, p. 90.

(37) fimile Pouget, Le Syndicat, p. 13 (fimile Pouget, Paris,

2d Edition).

(38) Sorel, Illusions du progres, p. 10 (Marcel Riviere et Cie.,

Paris, 1911).

(39) Compte-Rendu of the Fifth National Congress of the

French Socialist Party, 1908, p. 352.

(40) XI e. Congres National Corporatif, Paris, 1900, p. 198;

quoted by Levine, op. cit., p. 97.

(41) La Confederation GenSrale du Travail; II La Tactique.

(42) Idem.

(43) Cf. Proudhon, La Revolution sociale et le coup d'£tat,

(Ernest Flammarion, Paris) ; Goldman, Minorities versus
Majorities, in Anarchism and Other Essays; and Kro-
potkin, Les Minorites Revolutionnaires, in Paroles d'tm
revolte.

(44) Webb, The History of Trade Unionism, pp. 147-148.

368 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

(45) Compte-Rendu of the Third National Congress of the

French Socialist Party, 1906, pp. 189-192.

(46) Idem, p. 186.

(47) Jaures, Studies in Socialism, pp. 127-128.

(48) Idem, pp. 124-125.

(49) Idem, pp. 128-129.

(so) Compte-Rendu of the Fourth International Congress of the
International Working Men's Association, Basel, 1869,
p. 6.

(si) Kropotkin, The Great French Revolution, p. 423 (G. P.
Putnam's Sons, New York, 1909).

(52) Proudhon, Idee Generate de la Revolution au XlXe. Sli-

de, p. 304 (Gamier Freres, Paris, 1851).

(53) Idem. p. 197.

CHAPTER XI

(i) Proudhon, Idee Generate de la Revolution, p. 149.

(2) Roger A. Pryor, quoted in the report of the Investigation

of the Employment of Pinkerton Detectives : House Spe-
cial Committee Report, 1892, p. 225.

(3) Investigation of the Employment of Pinkerton Detectives:

Senate Special Committee Report, 1892, p. 247.

(4) Thomas Beet, Methods of American Private Detective

Agencies, Appleton's Magazine, October, 1906.

(5) Idem.

(6) Idem.

(7) Idem.

(8) New York Sun, May 8, 191 1.

(9) New York Call, September 14, 1910.

(10) Investigation of the Employment of Pinkerton Detectives:

House Special Committee Report, 1892, p. 226.

(11) See his testimony, pp. 92-94 of the Senate Report.

(12) Report of the Industrial Commission, 1901, Vol. VIII,

pp. 257-258, 261 (Chicago Labor Disputes).

(13) American Federationist, November, 1911, Vol. XVIII, p.

889.

(14) Limiting Federal Injunction: Hearings before a Sub-

committee of the Committee on the Judiciary, United
States Senate, Jan. 6, 1913, Part I, p. 19.

AUTHORITIES 369

(15) Idem, p. 20.

(16) Afpleton's Magazine, October, 1906.

(17) Hillquit, History of Socialism in the United States, pp.

280-281.

(18) Investigation of the Employment of Pinkerton Detectives,

Senate Special Committee Ileport, 1892, p. xiii.

(19) Idem, p. ii.

(20) Idem, p. xii.

(21) Idem, p. XV.

(22) Investigation of the Employment of Pinkerton Detectives:

House Special Committee Report, 1892, p. 224.

(23) Idem, p. 225.

(24) Report on the Chicago Strike of June- July, 1894, by the

United States Strike Commission, p. xxxviii.

(25) Idem, p. xliv. ,

(26) Idem, p. 3S6.

(27) Idem, p. 370.

(28) Idem, p. 397-

(29) Idem, pp. 366-367.

(30) Idem, p. 371.

(31) Idem, p. 368.
(3a) Idem, pp. 368-369.

(33) Idem, p. 372 (from the testimony of Harold I. Cleve-

land).

(34) Idem, p. 360.

(33) Debs, The Federal Government and the Chicago Strike,
p. 24 (Standard Publishing Co., Terre Haute* Ind., 1904).

(36) Idem, p; 24.

(37) Emma F. Langdon, The Cripple Creek Strike, p. 153 (The

Great Western Publishing Co., Denver, 1905).

(38) Report of the Commissioner of Labor, 1905, on Labor Dis-

turbances in Colorado, p. 186.

(39) Idem, p. 206.

(40) Idem, p. 304-

(41) Cf. Clarence S. Darrow, Speech in the HayWood Case, p.

56 (Wayland's Monthly, Girard, Kan., October, 1907).

(42) Report of the Commissioner of Labor, 1903, on Labor

Disturbances in Colorado, p. 192.

(43) C. Dobrogeaunu-Gherea, Socialism vs. Anarchism, New

York Call, February 3, iP"-

370 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

(44) Kropotkin, The Terror in Russia, p. 57 (Methuen & Co.,

London, 1909).

(45) Bamford, Passages in the Life of a Radical, Vol. II, p.

14 (T. Fisher Unwin, London, 1893).

(46) In Bamford's "Passages in the Life of a Radical" (T.

Fisher Unwin, London, 1893, we find that spies and
provocateurs were sent into the labor movement as
early as 1815. In Holyoake's "Sixty Years of an Agita-
tor's Life" (Unwin, 1900), in Howell's "Labor Legisla-
tion, Labor Movements, Labor Leaders" (Unwin, 1902),
and in Webb's "History of Trade Unionism" (Long-
mans, Green & Co., London, 1902), the work of several
noted police agents is spoken of. In Gammage's "His-
tory of the Chartist Movement" (Truslove & Hanson,
London, 1894) and in Davidson's "Annals of Toil" (F.
R. Henderson, London, n.d.) we are told of one police
agent who gave balls and ammunition to the men and
endeavored to persuade them to commit murder.

Marx, in "Revolution and Counter- Revolution" (Scrib-
ner's Sons, 1896), and Engels, in Revelations sur le
Proces des Communistes (Schleicher Freres, Paris,
1901), tell of the work of the German police agents in
connection with the Communist League; while Bebel,
in "My Life" (Chicago University Press, 1912), and in
Attentate und Sozialdemokratie (Vorwarts, Berlin,
1905), tells of the infamous work of provocateurs sent
among the socialists at the time of Bismarck's repres-
sion. Kropotkin, in "The Memoirs of a Revolutionist"
(Houghton, Mifflin & Co., Boston, 1899), and in "The
Terror in Russia" (Methuen & Co., London, 1909), de-
votes many pages to the crimes committed by the secret
police of Russia, not only in that country but else-
where. Mazzini, Marx, Bakounin, and nearly all prom-
inent anarchists, socialists, and republicans of the middle
of the last century, were surrounded by spies, who made
every effort to induce them to enter into plots.

In the "Investigation of the Employment of Pinkerton
Detectives : House and Senate Special Committee Re-
ports, 1892"; in the "Report on Chicago Strike of June-,
July, 1894; U. S. Strike Comrnission, 1895"; in the "Re-

AUTHORITIES 371

port of the Commissioner of Labor on Labor Disturb-
ances in Colorado, 1905"; in the "Report of the Indus-
trial Commission, 1901, Vol. VIII", there is a great mass
of evidence on the work of detectives, both in committing
violence themselves and in seeking to provoke others to
violence.

In "Conditions in the Paint Creek District of West
Virginia: Hearings before a subcommittee of the Com-
mittee on Education and Labor, U. S. Senate, 1913"; in
"Hearings before the Committee on Rules, House of
Representatives, on Conditions in the Westmoreland Coal
Fields"; in the "Report on the Strike at Bethlehem, Sen-
ate Document No. 521"; in "Peonage in Western Penn-
sylvania: Hearings before the Committee on Labor,
House of Representatives, 191 1," considerable evidence
is given of the thuggery and murder committed by de-
tectives, guards, and state constabularies. Some of this
evidence reveals conditions that could hardly be equaled
in Russia.

"History of the Conspiracy to Defeat Striking Hold-
ers" (Internatl. Holders' Union of N. America) ; "Limit-
ing Federal Injunction: Hearings before the Subcommit-
tee of the Committee on the Judiciary, U. S. Senate,
1912, Part V" ; the report of the same hearings for
January, 1913, Part I ; "United States Steel Corporation :
Hearings before Committee on Investigation, House of
Representatives, Feb. 12, 1912"; the "Report on Strike
of Textile Workers in Lawrence, Hass. : Commissioner
of Labor, 1912"; and "Strike at Lawrence, Hass.:
Hearings before the Committee on Rules, House of
Representatives, Harch 2-7, 1912," also contain a mass
of evidence concerning the crimes of detectives and the
terrorist tactics used by those employed to break strikes.

Alexander Irvine's "Revolution in Los Angeles'' (Los
Angeles, 1911) ; F. E. Wolfe's "Capitalism's Conspiracy
in California" (The White Press, Los Angeles, 1911) ;
Debs's "The Federal Government and the Chicago Strike"
(Standard Publishing Co., Terre Haute, Ind., 1904) ;
Ben Lindse/s "The Rule of Plutocracy in Colorado";
the "Reply of the Western Federation of Hiners to the

372 VIOLENCE AND THE LABOR MOVEMENT

'Red Book' of the Mine Operators"; "Anarchy in Colo-
rado: Who Is to Blame?" (The Bartholomew Publishing
Co., Denver, Colo., 1905) ; the American Federationist,
April, 1912; the American Federationist, November,
191 1 ; Job Harriman's "Class War in Idaho" {Volks-
Zeitung Library, New York, 1900) ; Emma F. Langdon's
"The Cripple Creek Strike" (The Great Western Pub-
lishing Co., Denver, 1905) ; C. H. Salmons' "The Bur-
lington Strike" (Bunnell & Ward, Aurora, 111., 1889) ;
and Morris Friedman's "The Pinkerton Labor Spy'' (Wil-
shire Book Co., New York, 1907), contain the statements
chiefly of labor leaders and socialists upon the violence
suffered by the unions as a result of the work of the
courts, of the police, of the militia, and of detectives.
"The Pinkerton Labor Spy" gives what purports to be
the inside story of the Pinkerton Agency and the de-
tails of its methods in dealing with strikes. Clarence S.
Darrow's "Speech in the Haywood Case" {Wayland's
Monthly, Girard, Kan., Oct., 1907) is the plea made be-
fore the jury in Idaho that freed Haywood. Only the
oratorical part of it was printed in the daily press, while
the crushing evidence Darrow presents against the de-
tective agencies and their infamous work was ignored.

Capt. Michael J. Schaack's "Anarchy and Anarchists"
(F. J. Schulte & Co., Chicago, 1899) ; and Pinkerton's
"The Molly Maguires and Detectives" (G. W. Dilling-
ham Co., New York, 1898) are the naive stories of those
who have performed notable roles in labor troubles.
They read like "wild-west" stories written by overgrown
boys, and the manner in which these great detectives
frankly confess that they or their agents were at the
bottom of the plots which they describe is quite in-
credible.

"The Chicago Martyrs : The Famous Speeches of the
Eight Anarchists in Judge Gary's Court and Altgeld's
Reasons for Pardoning Fielden, Neebe and Schwab"
(Free Society, San Franscisco, 1899), contains the mem-
orable message of Governor Altgeld when pardoning the
anarchists. In his opinion they were in no small measure
the dupes of police spies and the victims of judicial in-

AUTHORITIES 373

justice. I have dealt at length with Thomas Beet's ar-
ticle on "Methods of American Private Detectives" in
Appleton's Magazine for October, igo6, but it will repay
a full reading. "Cceur d'Alene Mining Troubles: The
Crime of the Century" (Senate Document) and "State-
ment and Evidence in Support of Charges Against the
U. S. Steel Corporation by the American Federation of
Labor" are perhaps worth mentioning.

I have not attempted to give an exhaustive list of ref-
erences, but only to call attention to a few books and
pamphlets which have found their way into my library.

(47) Quoted by August Bebel in Attentate und Sosialdemokra-

tie, p. 12.

(48) Limiting Federal Injunctions : Hearings before a Subcom-

mittee of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States
Senate, 1913, Part I, p. 8.

CHAPTER XII

(i) Sombart, Socialism and the Socialist Movement, p. 176.

(2) Liebknecht, Karl Marx: Biographical Memoirs, p. 46.

(3) Idem, p. 85.

(4) L'Alliance de la Democratie Socialiste, etc., p. 132 (Secret

Statutes of the Alliance).

(5) Communist Manifesto, p. 37.

(6) Idem, p. 32.

(7) Idem, p. 38.

(8) Engels' introduction to Struggle of the Social Qasses in

France; quoted by Sombart, op. cit., pp. 68-69.

(9) Liebknecht, No Compromise, No Political Trading, p. 28;

my italics.

(10) Frederic Harrison, quoted in Davidson's Annals of Toil,

p. 273 (F. R. Henderson, London, n.d.).

(11) Engels in L'Allemagne en 1848, p. 269.

(12) Communist Manifesto, p. 30.

INDEX

Adam, Paul, quoted concerning
case of RaVachol, 81-82.

Agents provocateurs, work of, in
popular uprisings and socialist
and labor movements, HO-120,
203-204, 264; use of private de-
tectives as, in United States,
290-292, 312-314.

Alexander II of Russia, assassina-
tion of, 56, 221.

America. See United States.

Anarchism, introduction of doc-
trines of, in Western Europe by
Bakounin, 5 S. ; secret societies
founded in interests of, 11-14;
insurrections under auspices of,
28-39; criticism of, by socialists,
40; uprisings in Italy fathered
by, 41-44; unbridgeable chasm
between socialism and, 47-48;
with the Propaganda of the
Deed becomes synonymous with
violence and crime, 55; foothold
secured by, in Germany, 55-57;
in Austria-Hungary, 57-58; agi-
tation in France, 58-60; doc-
trines of, carried to America by
Johann Most, 64-68; the Hay-
market tragedy, 68-70; defense
of, by Benjamin R. Tucker, and
disowning of terrorist tactics
70-74; responsibility for deeds
of leaders of, laid at Bismarck's
door, 74-75; assassination of
President McKinley and shoot-
ing of H. C. Frick, 75; failure of,
to take firm root in America any
more than in Germany and
England, 75-76; in the Latin
countries, 76; acts of violence in

name of, in Europe, 77-89 ; ques
tion of responsibility of, for acts
of violence committed by ter-
rorists, 90 ff . ; different types at-
tracted by socialism and, 92-93;
the psychology of devotees of,
93-94 ; causes of terrorist tactics
assigned by Catholic Church to
doctrines of socialism, 98-100;
source of, traceable to great-man
theory, 102 £f.; work of police
agents in connection with, 110-
120; the battle between social-
ism and, 154-192; emergence of,
as a distinct philosophy, 193;
history of, after Hague congress
of 1872, 194 ff.; congress in Ge-
nevain 1873, 196-199 ; insolvable
problem created by, in rejecting
political action of the working
class, 200 ; assaults on the Marx-
ists by adherents of, 201-204;
bitter warfare between socialism
and, 201-205; appearance of
syiidicalisnl as an aid to, 229-
239 ; ignoring of, in socialist con-
gresses, 232; appearance of the
"intellectuals" in ranks of, 239-
241; similarities between philos-
ophies and methods of syndical-
ism and, 239-245; differences
between syndicalism and, 245-
246; consideration of the oldest
form of, that of the wealthy tod
ruling classes, 276-326; of the
powerful in the United States,
280 ff.
Andrieux, French revolutionist,

Angiolillo, Italian terrorist, 87.
Anti-socialist law, Bismarck's, re-
sponsible for Most's career as a

375

376

INDEX

terrorist, 74r-75; passage of, and
chief measures contained in,
314-217; growth of socialist vote
uader, 225; failure and repeal of,
225-226.

Arson practiced by revolutionists
in America, 73-74.

Assassination, preaching of, by
Bakounin and NechayeS, 18;
practice of, by anarchists in
Prance, 77-89; the Catholic
Church and, 98-100; glorifica-
tion of, in history, 101-103.

Atwell, B. A., on character of dep-
uty marshals in Chicago railway
strike, 300.

Australia, parliamentary power of
socialists in, 329, 330.

Austria, Empress of, assassinated
by Italian anarchist, 87.

Austria - Hungary, development
and checking of anarchist move-
ment in, 57-58; growth of so-
cialist and labor vote in, 328.

Baker, Ray Stannard, quoted on
character of deputy marshals in
Chicago railway strike, 299-300.

Bakounin, Michael, father of ter-
rorism, 4; admiration of, for
Satan, 5 ; views held by, on abso-
lutism, 5-6; destruction of all
States and all Churches advo-
cated by, 6; varying opinions of,
7; shown to be human in his
contradictions, 7-8; chief char-
acteristics and qualities of his
many-sided nature, 8; birth,
family, and early life, 8-9 ; leaves
Russia for Germany, Switzer-
land, and France, 9; meets
Proudhon, Mmtc, George Sand,
and other revolutionary spirits,
9; leads insurrectionary move-
ments, 9-10; captured, sen-
tenced to death, and finally
banished to Siberia, 10; escapes
and reaches England, 10; change
in views shown in writings of,

10-11; spends some time in
Italy, 11-12; forms secret or-
ganization of revolutionists, 11-
13; the International Brothers,
the National Brothers, and the
International Alliance of Social
Democracy, 12-14; enters the
International Working Men's
Association, with the hope of
securing leadership, 15; declares
war on political and economic
powers of Europe and assails
Marz, Engels, and other lead-
ers, 15-16; interest of, in Rus-
sian affairs, 16; collaborates with
Sergei Nechayeif, 16-17; ex-
pounds doctrines of criminal ac-
tivity, 17-22; the "Words Ad-
dressed to Students," 17-19; the
"Revolutionary Catechism,"
19-22; quarrel between Necha-
yeff and, 23-26; remains in
Switzerland and trains young
revolutionists, 26-27; takes part
in unsuccessful insurrection at
Lyons, 28-35; Marx quoted
concerning action of, at Lyons,
35-36; influence of, felt in Span-
ish revolution of 1873, 37-41;
in Italy, during uprisings of
1874, 42-43; retires from public
life, 45-46; humiliating experi-
ences of last sears, 46-47 ; opin-
ions expressed by anarchists and
by socialists concerning, upon
death of, 47-48; teachings of,
the inspiration of the Propa-
ganda of the Deed, 52; principles
of, preached by Johann Most,
65; spread of terrorist ideas of, in
America, 65 ; history of the bat-
tle between Marx and, 154-193;
suspected and charged with
being a Russian police agent,
156, 158; quoted on Marx, 157;
victory won over Marx by, at
Basel congress of International
in 1869, 162-169 ; attack of Marx
and his followers on, and reply
by, in the "Study upon the
German Jews," 169-171; flood

INDEX

377

of literature by, based on his
antagonism to religion and to
Government, 172-174; inability
of, to comprehend doctrines of
Marxian socialism, 178-179; ir-
reconcilability of doctrines of,
with those of socialists, 179-185 ;
expulsion of, from the Inter-
national, 191; attacks the Gen-
eral Council of the International
as a new incarnation of the
State, 195; quoted to show an-
tagonism between his doctrines
and those of Marxists, 251; the
robber worship of, 278-279.

Barcelona, bomb-throwing in, 87.

Barrot, Odilon, 348.

Basel, congress of International at
(1869), 162-169.

Bauer, Heinrioh, 131.

Bauler, Madame A., quoted on
influence of Bakounin, 26-27.

Bebel, August, quoted on Bis-
marck's repressive measures,
55-56; quoted on Johann Most,
74-75; on the condoning of as-
sassination by the Catholic
Church, 98-99; reveals partici-
pations of high officials in crimes
of the anarchists, 114r-118; men-
tioned, 205, 209-210; account of
struggle between Bismarck and
party of, 211-227; State-social-
ist propositions favored by, 255-
256.

Beesby, E. S., 35; urges political
activity on early trade unions,
151.

Beet, Thomas, exposure by, of
evils attending use of detectives
in United States, 283-284, 290-
291, 314.

Berkman, Alexander, shooting of
H. C. Frick by, 75; motive
which actuated, 101; events
which led up to action of, 292-
295 ; fate of, contrasted with that
of agents of the anarchy of
the wealthy during Homestead
strike, 295.

Bern, revolutionary manifestation
at (1877), 53.

Berth, Edward, quoted in connec-
tion with the "intellectuals,"
240-241; mentioned, 270, 353.

Bismarck, stirs up Germany
against social-democratic party
on .account of anarchistic acts,
55; effect of action of, on anar-
chism in Germany, 56; responsi-
bility of, for Johann Most and
other terrorists, and for Hay-
market tragedy, 74r-75; Bebel
quoted in connection with the
hero-worship of, in Germany,
103-104; admiration of, for
Lassalle, 206; corruption intro-
duced into German labor move-
ment by, 210-211; exposed by
Liebknecht and Bebel, begins
war upon Marxian socialists,
211-212; futile efforts of, to
provoke social democrats to
violence, 218-219; reaction of
his violent measures upon him-
self, 227.

Blanc, Gaspard, 29, 31.

Blanc, Louis, 128, 129, 353; Las-
salle's views compared with
those of, 207.

Blanqui, socialist insurrectionist,
128-129.

Bonnot, French motor bandit, 88-
89, 104.

Booth, J. Wilkes, motive which
actuated, in killing of Lincoln,
101.

Brandos, George, "Young Ger-
many" by, 132; quoted on Las-
saUe, 205-206.

Brass, August, tool of Bismarck,
211.

Bray, J. F., 130.

Bresci, G.aetano, assassin of King
Humbert, 87.

Briand, Aristide, 184 n., 270, 353.

Brousse, Paul, 49, 196-197, 198;
originates phrase, "the Propa-
ganda of the Deed," 51-52;
leads revolutionary manifesta-

378

INDEX

tion at Bern, 53; leaves the Ba-
kouninists, 204.

Bucher, Lothar, tool of Bismarck,
210.

Burlington strike, outrages by
private detectives during, 296.

Burns, William J., quoted on char-
acter of detectives as a class,
284^285.

C

Cabet, Utopian socialism of, 144.

Cafiero, Carlo, Italian revolution-
ist, disciple of Bakounin, 38, 45,
46, 47, 49, 50, 51, 54.

Camorra, an organization of Ital-
ians which pursues terrorist tac-
tics, 100.

"Capital," Marx's work, 152, 344.

Capitalism, workingmen's igno-
rance concerning, previous to
advent of Karl Marx, 338-341.

Carnot, President, assassination
of, 85.

Caserio, assassin of President Car-
not, 79, 85-86.

Castillo, Canovas del, torture of
suspected terrorists by, 87.

Catholic Church, burden of an-
archism laid on doctrines of so-
cialism by, 98; right of assassi-
nation upheld by clergy of, 98-
99; terrorist tactics pursued by
organizations of, 100.

Cerretti, Celso, Italian insurrec-
tionist, 42.

Chartists, the, 130, 136, 137, 149.

Cluseret, General, 29, 32, 36.

Colorado, governmental tyranny
during labor wars in, 217; politi-
cal and industrial battles in
(1894-1904), 302-311.

Commune of Paris, viewed as a
spontaneous uprising of the
working class, 36-37.

Communist League, Marx pre-
sents his views to, resulting in
the Communist Manifesto, 137—
138.

Communist Manifesto, of Marx
and Engels, 137-141 ; the univer-

sal text-book of the socialist
movement, 334.

Communist societies in Germany,
131.

Congress of United States, social-
ists not represented in, 330, 333.

Congresses, international, of so-
cialists, 334.

Cooper, Thomas, 130.

Cooperative movement, beginning
of, in England, 130; progress in
growth of, 331-332.

Corruption, the omnipresence of,
263-264.

Costa, Andrea, 42; at anarchist
congress in Geneva (1873), 197-
198; article by, attacking social-
ists, 201; leaves the Bakoun-
inists, 204.

Courts, prevalence of violence set
down to corruption of, 107, 108.

Cramer, Peter J., union leader
killed by special police, 287.

Criminal elements,, part played by,
in uprisings, 109-110; use of, as
the tool of reactionary intrigue,
110 ff., 281-326.

Cripple Creek, Colo., strike, 304-
306.

Cjrvoct, militant anarchist of
Lyons, 59-60.

Czolgosz, assassin of President
McKinley, 75, 88; motive which
actuated, 101.

Debs, Eugene V., on instigation to
violence by deputies in Chicago
railway strike, 301-302.

Decamps, French terrorist, 79.

Delesalle, French anarchist, a spon-
sor of sabotage as a war measure
of trade unionists, 236.

Democracy, attacks of syndicalism
on, 264-265 ; view of the present
day as the age of, 349; to be
achieved only through democ-
racy, 350, 352; eternal faith of
socialists in, 353.

Detectives, employment of, as
weapons of anarchists of the

INDEX

379

wealthy class in the United
States, 281 ff.; character of the
so-called, employed during big
strikes in United States, 282-
290; use of, as instigators and
perpetrators of acts of violence,
290-292, 299-302, 312-314; pe-
cuniary interest of, in provoking
crime, 314; intentional mislead-
ing of employers by, 316-319;
prolongation of strikes by, 319-
320 ; a few of the outrages com-
mitted by, 320-321.

Deville, Gabriel, 202.

Direct action, opposed by syn-
dicalists to the political action
of socialists, 267 ff.; cannot be
revolutionary action and is des-
tined to failure, 272.

Duehring, Eugene, mistaken views
of socialism held by, 186.

Duval, Clement, French anarchist
and robber, 77-78.

Dynamite, glorifying of, by ter-
rorists, as the poor man's wea-
pon against capitalism, 69.

E

Eccarius, reply of, to Bakounin at
Basel congress, 178; at anarchist
congress in Geneva (1873), 196.

Egoistic conception of history,
carried to its extreme by anar-
chism, 102 ff.

Engels, Frederick, 15; criticism by,
of position of Bakouninists in
Spanish revolution, 40, 41; de-
scription by, of early communist
societies in Germany, 131; first
meeting of Marx and, and be-
ginning of their cooperative
labors, 132-133; reply of, to Dr.
Duehring, 186; socialist view of
the State as expressed by, 257-
258; on the lasting power exer-
cised by Marx over the labor
movement, 338; on the reor-
ganization of society through
the conscious cooperation of the
masses, 347-348.

F

Fenians, an organization of Irish-
men which pursued terrorist
tactics, 100.

Feudal lords, anarchism of the,
277-278, 279.

Fortis, Italian revolutionist, 42.

Fourier, 128; Utopian socialism of,
144.

France, anarchist activities in
(1882), 58-60; deeds of terrorists
in, 77-86; effects of terrorist
tactics in, 86-87; crimes of mo-
tor bandits in, 88-89; early days
of socialism in, 128-129 ; launch-
ing of socialist labor party in
(1878), 202-203; individualism
in, one cause for rise of syn-
dicalism, 242—243; poverty as a
cause for reliance upon violence
of trade unions in, 244.

Frick, Henry C, shooting of, 75;
events which led up to shooting
of, 292-295.

Fruneau, quoted on corruption in
revolutions, 263.

G

General Confederation of Labor,
organization of, 233.

General strike, inauguration of
idea, by French trade unionists,
233-234 ; Guferard's argument
for, 234-235; notable points in
program of action of, 235-236;
program of trade unionists in
case of success in, 237-238 ; con-
ditions which produce agitation
for, 243-244; doubts of syn-
dicalists as to success of a peace-
able strike, 246-247; JaurSs'
warning against the, 270; ridi-
cule of, by Marx and Engels,
343.

Geneva, congress of anarchists at,
in 1873, 196-199.

Germany, beginning of anarchist
activity in, 55-57; great polit-
ical organization built up by

38o

INDEX

socialists in, 203 ; meteoric career
of Lassalle in, 205-209; history
of Bismarck's losing battle with
social democracy in, 211-227;
State ownership favored by so-
cialists in, 264r-256; growth of
socialist and labor vote in, 328;
strong parliamentary position of
socialists in, 329-330.

Goldman, Emma, quoted on Jo-
hann Most, 67 ; quoted on causes
of violent acts by terrorists, 91 ;
on the connection of police with
anarchist outrages, 119.

Grave, Jean, French anarchist, 81.

Gray, John, 130.

Great-man theory, terrorist deeds
of violence traceable to, 102 ff.

Gu§rard, argument of, for revo-
lutionary general strike, 234r-
235.

Guesde, Jules, 202, 204; quoted on
direct action vs. political action,
267-269.

Guillaume, James, Swiss revolu-
tionist, friend of Bakounin, 28,
38, 42, 45, 47, 53, 197, 199, 229;
takes part in manifestation at
Bern (1877), 63.

Hales, John, at anarchist congress
in Geneva (1873), 196-199.

Hall, Charles, 130.

Harney, George Julian, 137.

Harrison, Frederic, quoted, 151.

Hasselmann, German revolution-
ist, 56, 65; ejection of, from so-
cialist party, 220.

Haymarket catastrophe, Chicago,
68-70.

Henry, fimile, French terrorist,

, 79, 84r-85, 104.

Herwegh, German poet and revo-
lutionist, 157-158.

Hess, Moritz, secret history of
Basel congress of 1869 by, 169-
170.

Hillquit, Morris, description by, of
battle between strikers and -de-
tectives at Homestead, 293-294.

Hins, follower of Bakounin, quoted,
163; outlines, in 1869, program
of modern syndicalists, 166-167.

Hodel, assassin of Emperor Wil-
liam, 55, 213.

Hodgskin, Thomas, 130.

Hogan, "Kid," quoted on strike-
breakers, 288-289.

Homestead ''strike, character of
Pinkertons employed in, 285-
286; account of battle between
strikers and special police, 292-
294.

Houses of the People, in Europe,
332.

Humbert, King, attempt upon life
of, 55; assassination of, 87.

Hume, Joseph, 130.

Individualism in France a contrib-
uting cause to rise of syndical-
ism, 242-243.

Industrial Workers of the World,
American syndicalism, 247 n.

Inheritance, abolition of right of,
advocated by Bakounin, 163-
164.

Intellectuals, appearance of, as an
aid to anarchism, 239-241; lack
of real understanding of labor
movement by, and fate of, 354.

International Alliance of Social
Democracy, 12-14.

International Brothers, 12-14.

International Working Men's As-
sociation (the "International"),
Bakounin's attempt to inject his
ideas into, 7, 15; launching of
the, 145-146; beginning made
by, in actual political work, 150-
152; struggles in, between fol-
lowers of Marx and followers of
Bakounin's anarchist doctrines,
154 S.; congress of, at Basel in
1869 the turning-point in its his-
tory, 162-168; overturning of
foundation principles of, owing
to anarchist tendencies of the
congress, 168; period of slight
accomplishment, from 1869 to

INDEX

381

1873, 189-190; congress of 1873
at The Hague, 191; expulsion of
Bakounin and removal of seat
of General Council to New York,
191-192; motives of Marx in
destroying, 192; one chief result
of existence of, the distinct sep-
aration of anarchism and social-
ism, 192-193; attempts of Ba-
kouninists to revive, after Hague
congress, 196 ff.; end of efforts
of anarchists to build a new, 200.

International Working People's
Association, anarchist society in
America, 68, 73.

Italy, anarchist uprisings in, in

1874, 41-44; demonstration un-
der doctrines of Propaganda of
the Deed in (1877), 53-54; rea-
sons for individual execution of
justice in, found in expense of
official justice and corruptness of
courts, 108; conditions in, lead-
ing to rise of syndicalism, 242,
243; socialist and labor vote in,
328; parliamentary strength of
socialists in, 330.

Iwanoff, Russian revolutionist,
22-23.

Jaclard, Victor, 14, 29.

Jaurfes, tribute paid to Marx by,
152-153; warning pronounced
by, against the general strike,
270.

Jesuits and doctrine of assassina-
tion, 98-99.

Jones, Ernest, 130.

K

Kammerer, anarchist in Austria-
Hungary, 57, 58.

Kampffmeyer, Paul, quoted on
State-socialist propositions in
Germany, 255.

Kautsky, Karl, on the Statism of
the socialist party, 256.

Kropotkin, Prince, 49-50; enthu-
siasm of, over the Propaganda of

the Deed, 52; quoted on anar-
chist activities at Lyons, 59;
on act of United States Supreme
Court declaring unconstitutional
the eight-hour law on Govern-
ment work, 62-63; quoted on
the Pittsburgh strike, 63-64; on
treatment of anarchists by so-
cialists, 92 n. ; quoted on Russian
secret police system, 113 n. ; ar-
ticles by, attacking socialist
parliamentary tactics, 201-202;
on the necessity of parliamen-
tary action in distribution of
land after the French Revolu-
tion, 272.

Labor movement, violence char-
acteristic of early years of the,
125-126 ; beginning of real build-
ing of, in the middle of the last
century, 127; profit to, from aid
of "intellectual" circles, 127; in
France, 128-129; in England,
129-131; setback to, in England
due to various causes, 131; be-
ginnings of, in Germany, 131-
134; beginning of work of Marx
and Engels in connection with,
132 S. ; attempt of early socialist
and anarchist sects to inject
their ideas into, 145; launching
of the International, 145 ff. ; en-
trance of the International into
actual political work, 150-rl52;
the ideal of the labor movement
as expressed by Lincoln, 152;
part played by the International
as an organization of labor, 192;
origins of, in Germany, 209;
Bismarck's persecution of social
democrats in Germany, 211-
227 ; entrance of anarchism into,
in France, 231 ff.; illegitimate
activities of capital against, in
United States, 280-326; process
of building structure of the
present, 335-337; position as a
great and material actuality,

382

INDEX

337; tracing of work done by
Marx in connection with, 338 ff . ;
progress of, as indicated by so-
cialist and labor vote, 328-329;
parliamentary strength of, 329-
331 ; growth of cooperations and
trade unions, 331—333.

Ldhm Standard article on United
States Supreme Court decision,
62-63.

Labor Temples in Europe, 332.

Labriola, Arturo, syndicalist "crit-
icism of socialism by, 249-251;
views of, on Parliamentarism,
261.

Lafargue, Paul, 202.

Lagardelle, on the antagonism of
syndicalism and democracy,
264-265.

Lankiewicz, Valence, 28.

Lassalle, German socialist agita-
tor, 205 ff.; by organizing the
Universal German Working
Men's Association, becomes
founder of German labor move-
ment, 209; relations between
Bismarck and, 210.

Legieu, Carl, quoted on French
labor movement, 243.

Le Vin, detective, quoted on char-
acter of special police, 286.

Levine, Louis, "The Labor Move-
ment in EVance" by, quoted,
244.

Liebknecht, Wilhelm, quoted on
Marx's opposition to insurrec-
tion led by Herwegh, 158; men-
tioned, 205, 209-210; efforts of
Bismarck to corrupt, 211; per-
secution of, by Bismarck, 211-
212; frank statement of repub-
lican principles by, 212-213;
quoted on defeat of Bismarck by
socialists, 226; quoted as in
favor of State-socialist proposi-
tions in Germany, 256.

Lincoln, Abraham, ideal of the
labor movement as expressed by,
152.

Lingg, Louis, Chicago anarchist,
70, 95.

Lombroso, on corrective measures
to be used with anarchists, 9&*
97; on the complicity of crimi>-
nality and politics, 109.

Lovett, William, 130.

Luccheni, Italian assassin, 87.

Lynchings, an explanation given
for, 107, 108.

Lyons, unsuccessful insiHTection
at, in 1870, 28-35.

M

McDoweU, Malcomb, on character
of deputy marshals in Chicago
railway strike, 300-301.

McKinley, President, assassina-
tion of, 75, 88.

McNaxnaras, the, 318, 324.

Mafia, the, an organization of
Italians which pursues terror-
ist tactics, 100.

Malatesta, Enrico, Italian revo-
lutionist, 43-44, 49, 51.

Manufacturers' Association, law-
less work of the, 318.

Mariana, Jesuit who upheld as-
sassination of tyrants, 98, 99.

Marx, Karl, view of Bakounin
held by, 7; meeting of Bakounin
and, 9; assailed by Bakounin
upon latter's entrance into the
International, 15-16; quoted on
the insurrection at Lyons in
1870, 35-36; on Bakounin's
"abolition of the State," 36; on
the Commune of Paris, 37; edu-
cation and early career of, 132-
134; the Communist Manifesto,
137-141; resignation of, from
central council of Communist
League, 141-142; gives evidencp
of perception of lack of revolu-
tionary promise in sectarian or-
ganizations, secret societies, and
political conspiracies, 142; gi-
gantic intellectual labors of, in
laying foundations of a scientific
socialism, 143; the Interna-
tional launched by, 145-146; es-
sence of socialism of, in Pre-

INDEX

383

amble of the Provisional Rules
of the International, 147^148;
statement of idea of, as to revo-
lutionary character of political
activity, 149-150; immense work
of, in connection with the Inter-
national, and publishing of
"Capital" by, 152; summing up
of services of, by Jaur^s, 152-
153; the battle between Bakou-
nin and, 154 fF. ; annoyance and
humiliation of, by victory of
Bakouninists at Basel congress,
168-169; bitter attack made on
Bakounin and his circle by, 169-
170; motives of, in destroying
the International by moving
seat of General Council to New
York, 191-192; Bismarck's at-
tempt to corrupt, 210; view held
by, of the State and its func-
tions, 257; quoted on "parlia-
mentary crfetinism," 261-262;
battles of worWngmen fought on
lines laid dawn by, 338; im-
mensity of task actually exe-
cuted lor, 344-356.

Merlino, Italian anarchist, 81.

Michel, Louise, French anarchist,
60.

Milwaukee, character of special
police employed during molders'
strike in, 286-287.

Mine Owners' Association, anar-
chism of, in Colorado, 304-311.

MoU, Joseph, 132, 137.

MoUy Maguires, an organization
of Irishmen which pursued ter-
rorist tactics, 100.

Most, Johann, a product of Bis-
marck's man-hunting policy and
legal t3Tanny, 56; the Freiheit of,
57, 65; brings terrorist ideas of
Bakounin and Nechayeff to
America, 64^65; early history of,
65-66; Emma Goldman's de-
scription of, 67; effect of agita-
tion and doctrines of, on social-
ism in America, 67-68; climax of
theories of, reached in the Hay-
market tragedy, Chicago, 68-70;

article on "Revolutionary Prin-
ciples" by, 69-70; history of
terrorist tactics in America cen-
ters about career of, 74; respon-
sibility of anti-socialist laws for
misguided efforts and final
downfall of, 74-75; ejected from
socialist party for advocating
violence in war with Bismarck,
219-220.

Motor bandits, career of, in
France, 88-89.

Museux, quoted on Ravachol, 82.

"Muzzle Bill," Bismarck's, 221.

N

National Brothers, the, 12-14.

Nechayeff, Sergei, young Russian
revolutionist, 16; collaboration
of, with Bakounin, 16 ff.; ques-
tion of share of "Words Ad-
dressed to Students" and "The
Revolutionary Catechism" to
be attributed to, 22; activities
of, in Russia, 22-23; murder of
Iwanoff by, 23; quarrels with
Bakounin, steals his papers, and
flees to London, 23; subsequent
career and death, 25-26.

Nobiling, Dr. Karl, 55, 214.

O

O'Brien, J. B., 130.

O'Connor, Feargus, 130, 353.

Orchard, Harry, crimes of, paid
for by detective agencies, 307-
310.

Owen, Robert, 130; Utopian social-
ism of, 144; in the Webbs'
critique of, the economic falla-
cies of syndicalism are revealed,
260-261.

Ozerof, revolutionary enthusiast,
friend of Bakounin, 28, 30, 34.

Paris, anarchist movement in
(1883), 60; acts of violence in,
77-89.

384

INDEX

Parliamentarism, criticism of, by
syndicalists, 249, 261; attituda
of socialism toward, 262-263.

Parliamentary streneth of social-
ism at present day, 329-331.

Pelloutier, leader in French labor
movement, 231.

Peukert, anarchist in Austria-
Hungary, 57, 58; found to be a
police spy, 113-114.

Pinkerton detectives, the tools of
anarchists of the capitalist class
in the United States, 281 ff.

Place, Francis, 130.

Plechanoff, George, 53; quoted,
200; breaks with the Bakounin-
ists, 204.

Pini, French anarchist and robber,
96.

Police agents, work of, against an-
archism, socialism, and trade-
union noveriients, 110-120, 203-
204; infamous rdles played by,
in United States, 290-292, 299-
302, 312-314; list of notable,
who have played a double part
in labor movements, 313.

Policing by the State, a check
on anarchism of individuals,
279.

Political action, dependence of
Marx's program on, 137-141;
fight of anarchists against, 232;
criticism of, by syndicalists,
249 ff . ; direct action placed over
against, by the syndicalists,
267 ff.

Pougatchoff, Bakounin's idealizing
of, 278.

Pouget, Emit, French anarchist,
60; origin of modern syndical-
ism with, 231; sabotage intro-
duced by, at trade-union con-
gress in Toulouse, 235; attack
of syndicalism on democracy
voiced by, 264; on the syndical-
ist's contempt for democracy,
266.
Poverty, as a cause of reliance
upon violence by French trade
unions, 244.

Propaganda of the Deed, origin of
tha, 49-52; inspiration of, found
in the teachings of Bakounin,
52 ; revolutionary demonstra-
tions organized under doctrines
of, 52-54 ; as the chief expression
of anarchism, makes the name
anarchism synonymous with vio-
lence and crime, 55; progress of,
as shown by anarchist activities
in Germany, Austria-Hungary,
and France, 55-60; influence of,
in Italy, Spain, and Belgium,
60-61 ; bringing of, to America
by Johann Most, 62-76. See
Terrorism.

Proudhon, acquaintance between
Bakounin and, 9; the father of
anarchism, 129.

Proudhonian anarchists, inability
of, to comprehend socialism of
Marx, 148-149.

Pryor, Judge Roger A., condem-
nation by, of use of private de-
tectives by corporations, 297-
298.

Pullman strike, emplojTnent and
character of private detectives
in, 298-302.

Ravachol, French terrorist, 79-82,
104.

Razin, Stenka, leader of Russian
peasant insurrection, 17; Ba-
kounin's robber worship of, 278.

Reclus, filisSe, 14; quoted con-
cerning Ravachol, 81.

Hed Flag, Hasselmanu's paper, 56.

Reinsdorf, August, assassin of
German Emperor, 69-70.

"Revolutionary Catechism," by
Bakounin and Nechayeff, 19-22.

Rey, Aristide, 14.

Richard, Albert, 29, 32.

Rittinghausen, delegate to con-
gress of the International, quot-
ed, 162-163; on the futUity of
insurrection as a policy, 272.

Robber-worship, Bakounin's, 17,
278.

INDEX

385

Rochdale Pioneers, the, 130.
Rochefort, Henri, remarks of, on

anarchists, 70-71.
Rubin, W. B., investigation of

character of special police by,

286-287.
Rull, Juan, Spanish gang leader,

119.

Sabotage, danger of use of, in
United States, 324-325; appear-
ance of, and explanation, 236;
as really another name for the
Propaganda of the Deed, 247.

Saffi, Italian revolutionist, 42.

Saignes, Eugene, 30, 31.

Saint-Simon, 128.

Salmons, C. H., on outrages by
private detectives during Bur-
lington strike, 296.

Sand, George, 9, 158.

Schapper, Karl, 131, 141.

Secret societies organized by Ba-
kounin, 11-14.

Shelley, P. B., psychology of the
anarchists depicted by, 93.

Small, Albion W., estimate of
Marx by, 143.

Socialism, early use of word, 34 n. ;
split between anarchism and, in
1869, 47-48, 162-169; rapid
spread of, in America after panic
of 1873, 64-65; disastrous eflect
on, of Most's agitation in Amer-
ica, 67-68; contrasted with an-
archism on the point of the
latter's inspiring deeds of vio-
lence by terrorists, 90-92; dif-
ferent types attracted by anar-
chism and, 92-93; burden of
anarchism placed on, by Cath-
olic clergy, 98; growth of, 125 ff.,
202-203; early days of, in
France, 128-129; in England,
129-131; in Germany, 131-134;
Communist Manifesto of Marx
and Engels a part of the basic
literature of, 138; the Utopian,
destroyed by Marx's soientifio

theory, 144-145; the blending
of labor and, a matter of dec-
ades, 145; essence of Marx's,
found in the Preamble of the
Provisional Rules of the Inter-
national, 147-148; routing of, by
anarchist doctrines in congress
of International at Basel in
1869, 162-169; inquiry into and
exposition of the aims of the
Marxian, 174-178; attacks on,
by anarchists after Hague con-
gress of 1872, 201 ff.; fruitless
war waged on German social
democracy by Bismarck, 211-
227; defeat and humiliation of
Bismarck by, 225-227; strength
of, throughout Europe shown in
elections of 1892, 227-228; dif-
ference between aims and meth-
ods of, and those of syndicalism,
238-239; antagonism between
syndicalism and, 247 ff.; 266;
Statism of, criticised by syn-
dicalists, 249-251, 252; real po-
sition of, regarding State owner-
ship and State capitalism, 252-
258; criticism of, by syndicalists
on grounds of Parliamentarism,
261; real attitude of, toward
control of parliaments, 262-263 ;
battle of, is against both the old
anarchists, and the new anar-
chists of the wealthy class in
the United States, 325-326; sta-
tistics of increase in vote of,
328-329 ; parliamentary strength
of, 329-331; conditions which
retard progress of, in United
States, 332-333; tendency of
labor movement in all lands to-
ward, 333-334 ; internationalcou-
gresses of party, 334; results of
inseparableness of democracy
and, 353-354; slow but sure and
steady progress of, 355-356.
Sombart, Werner, quoted on syn-
dicalism and the "social syba-
rites," 241; quoted on tendency
of labor movement in all lands
toward socialism, 333.

386

INDEX

Sorel, quoted to show hostility of
syndjcaliam to democisoy, 284.

Spain, revolution of 1873 in, 37-
41; repression of terrorist tac-
tics in, 87.

Spies, August, "revenge circuleir"
of, 68.

State, check placed on anarchism
of the individual by the, 279-
280; activity of, in opposition to
labor in United States, 322-324.

Statism, criticism of, of the social-
ist party, by syndicalists, 249-
252; statement of ' attitude
of socialism toward, 252-258;
economic f aUacies of syndicalists
regarding, pointed out by the
Webbs on their critique of
Owen's trade-union socialism,
260-261.

Steinert, Heniy, quoted on special
police and detectives, 285.

Stellmacher, anaichjst in Austria-
Hungary, 57, 68.

Stephens, Joseph Rayner, 130,
353.

Stirner, Max, "The Ego and His
Own" by, quoted, -105.

"Study upon the German Jews,"
Bakounin's, 170-171.

Supreme Court of United States,
act of, declaring unconstitu-
tional the eight-hour law on
Government work, 62-63.

Syndicalism, program of, outlined
at congress of International in
1865, 166-167; forecast of, con-
tained in Bakounin's arguments,
185; revival in 1895 of anar-
chism under name of, 229; ex-
planation of, and reason for
existence, 230 ff.; wherein aim
and methods differ from those of
socialism, 238-239; connection
of the "intellectuals" with, 239-
241; reasons found for, in cer-
tain French and Italian condi-
tions, 242-245; essential differ-
ences between anarchism and,
245-246; necessary antagonism
between socialism and, 247 ff.;

objections to the outline of a
new society contemplated by,
259 ff.; criticism of Parliamen-
tarism of socialism by, 261; at-
tacks of, on democracy, 264-
265; antagonism of socialism
and, in aim and methods, 266 S;
proven to be the logical de-
scendant of anarchism, 270-271 ;
its fate to be the same as that of
anarchism, 271-272; claim of,
that revolutionary movement
must pursue economic aims and
disregard political relations, 273.

T

Tennyson, quotation from, 96.

Terrorism, doctrine of, brought
into Western Europe by Ba-
kounin, 4, 9-10, 17 ff. ; set forth
in "Revolutionary Catechism"
by Bakounin and Nechayeff,
19-22; practical introduction of,
in insurrections of the early
seventies, 28 ff., 41—44; criticism
of, by socialists, 40; advent of
the Propaganda of the Deed,
and resultant acts of violence in '
Italy, 50-55; carried into Ger-
many, Austria-Hungary, and
France, 66-60; doctrine of,
spread in America by Johann
Most, 65-68; protest voiced by
Tucker, American anarchist,
against terrorist tactics, 70-74;
failure of, to take deep root in
America, 75-76; acts of, com-
mitted by anarchists in France,
77-89; causes of, 90 ff.; due to
hysteria and pseudo-insanity,
93-94; wrong attitude of society
as to corrective measures, 94-
98; burden of, placed by Cath-
olics on socialism, 98-101; glori-
fication of, in annals of history,
101; egoistic conception of his-
tory carried to an extreme in,
102-106; caused by corruption
of courts and oppressive laws,
107-108; complicity of crimi-

INDEX 387

nality and, 109 ; use of, by Euro-
pean governments, 1 10-120,
219 ff.; introduced into the
International by Bakounin, and
straggles of Marxists against,
154-193; part played by, in
Bismarck's war on social democ-
racy, 213, 217, 218; attempts of
Bismarck to provoke, 219 ff.;
reaction of, on Bismarck, 227;
employed by ruling class in
America, by means of private
detectives and special police,
276-324.

Thompson, William, 130.

Tolstoi, Berth's characterization
of, 241.

Tortellier, French agitator and
anarchist, 231; declaration of,
against political action, 232.

Trade unions, at basis of Spanish
revolution of 1873, 39; entrance
into, of anarchism, resulting in
syndicalism, 231 ff. See Labor
movement.

Tucker, Benjamin R., New York
anarchist, quoted on "The
Beast of Communism," 70-74.

U

United States, unsettled conditions
in, after panic of 1873, 62-64;
development of socialist and
trade-union organizations in,
64; Bakounin's terrorist ideas
brought to, by Johann Most,
65; acts of violence in, 67-70;
protests of anarchists of, against
terrorism, 70-74; failure of anar-
chism to take firm root in, 75;
anarchism of the powerful in,
280 ff.; system of extra-legal
police agents in, 281-291, 311 ff. ;
account of tragic episodes in
history of labor disputes in, 291-
311; abetting by the State of
mercenary anarchists in, 322-
325; figures of socialist and labor

vote in, 328; socialists of, wholly
lacking in representation in Con-
gress, 330, 333; conditions in,
calculated to retard progress of
socialist and labor movement,
332-333.

Universal German Working Men's
Association, organization of,
209.

Utopian socialism destroyed by
Marx's scientific socialism, 144.

Vaillant, August, French terrorist,
79, 82-84, 104.

Valzania, Italian revolutionist, 42.

Vincenzo, Tomburri, Italian revo-
lutionist, 54.

Violence, analysis of causes of, 90-
122. iSee Terrorism.

Vliegen, Dutch labor leader, on the
general strike, 243-244.

Yon Schweitzer, leader in German
labor movement, reported to
have sold out to Bismarck, 211.

Yote of socialists and laborites
(1887-1913), 328, 329.

W

Webb, Sidney and Beatrice, eco-
nomic fallacies of syndicalism
indicated by, 260-261.

Weitling, early German socialist
agitator, 132.

Western Federation of Miners,
crimes falsely attributed to,
307-310.

West Virginia, governmental tyr-
anny during labor troubles in,
217; outrages committed by
special police in, 292.

Wickersham, George W., testi-
mony of, as to packing of a jury
by private detectives, 289.

William I., Emperor, attempts on
life of, 55, 213-214.

3^8

INDEX

"Words Addressed to Students,"
Bakounin and Necfaayeff's, 17.

Wyden, secret conference of Ger-
man social democrats at, 219-
220.

Yvetot, quoted on syndicalism and
anaxchisin, 246.

Zenker, quoted on anarchist move-
ment in Austria-Hungary, 57-
58; on association formed by
Most for uniting revolutionists,
66; on motives behind deeds of
violence, 100.

Zola, psychology Of the anarchist
depicted by, 93.

DATE DUE

'Sgrt^f^S-^^

r^Y

mrmm

5'8A

llNTED IN US A.

HX 828.H8"""'""'"""^'-""'''^

Violence and the labor Movement,

3 1924 002 64l"""o'52"" ,„